The court upheld that additional evidence must be timely and justified to avoid prejudice to the defense, maintaining the integrity of the trial process.

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

1. Petitioner, who is the defacto complainant, is before this Court assailing the order dated 05.06.2025 passed on the application filed by the prosecution under Sections 242 and 311 of Cr.P.C. in C.C.No.2840/2019 by the Court of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506, 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, with a prayer to quash the aforesaid order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner after reiterating the grounds urged in the petition submits that if the prosecution is not permitted to produce additional documents, the case of the prosecution will be seriously prejudiced. The said documents were submitted by the defacto complainant to the investigating officer during the course of investigation, however they were not included as part of the charge sheet. He submits that Section 242 of Cr.P.C. provides ampful power to the Courts to take all such material produced on behalf of the prosecution at any stage. In support of his contention, he has relied on the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.13023/2023 disposed off on 27.03.2024.

4. Petitioner is the defacto complainant in Crime No.8/2019 registered by Dharwad Women Police Station, Dharwad for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506, 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed in the said case against respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein. In the said proceedings, at the stage of recording of statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., two separate applications under Sections 242 and 311 of Cr.P.C. filed by the prosecution were rejected by the trial Court vide the order impugned. Aggrieved by the same, the defacto complainant is before this Court.

5. It is not in dispute that the documents which are now sought to be produced were not part of the charge sheet. The trial in the case had commenced in the year 2021. The defacto complainant was examined before the trial Court in the month of June 2023. Thereafter, other charge sheet witnesses were examined before the trial Court and after the prosecution had closed its side of evidence, the matter was posted before the trial Court for the purpose of recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. It is at this stage, prosecution had filed two separate applications under Sections 242 and 311 of Cr.P.C. which were rejected on 05.06.2025. Being aggrieved by the same, defacto complainant is before this Court.

6. Section 242 of Cr.P.C. reads as under:

“242. Evidence for prosecution.-(1) If the accused refuses to plead or does not plead, or claims to be tried or the Magistrate does not convict the accused under Section 241, the Magistrate shall fix a date for the examination of witnesses:

Provided that the Magistrate shall supply in advance to the accused, the statement of witnesses recorded during investigation by the police.

(2) The Magistrate may, on the application of the prosecution, issue a summons to any of its witnesses directing him to attend or to produce any document or other thing.

(3) On the date so fixed, the Magistrate shall proceed to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution:

Provided that the Magistrate may permit the cross-examination of any witness to be deferred until any other witness or witnesses have been examined or recall any witness for furt