##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3513

1 CRR-5786-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH

rd

ON THE 3 OF FEBRUARY, 2026

CRIMINAL REVISION No. 5786 of 2025

ROHIT

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Appearanc

Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner [P-1].

Shri Prashant Jain appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].

Heard on: 07.01.2026

Delivered On: 03.02.2026

ORDER

This criminal revision is preferred under Section 438 read with Section

441 of BNSS, 2023 being aggrieved by the order dated 08.09.2025 in ST

No.102/2020 by Additional Session Judge, Depalpur, Indore whereby the

application under Section 91 of Cr.P.c., 1973 (Annexure A/2) for

summoning the documents mentioned in the application has been rejected.

Simultaneously, the application under Section 231(2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 for

permitting the cross-examination of the witnessed to be deferred, has also

been dismissed.

2. Facts in brief are that, the revision petitioner is facing trial for the

charges under Section 420 read with Section 120-B, 467 read with Section

120-B, 468 read with section 120-B, 471 read with Section 120-B and 406

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: AMIT KUMAR

Signing time: 03-02-2026

19:29:01

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3513

2 CRR-5786-2025

read with Section 120-B of IPC in a case arising out of Crime No.153/2019

registered at Police Station, Betma, Indore. The charges were framed on

12.02.2022 and at the stage of prosecution evidence, the revision petitioner

and co-accused Neha Sharma filed two application on 26.09.2023, i.e. one

application was under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., 1973 for the documents

mentioned in para no.2 to 12 to be summoned submitting that they are in

possession of complainant party. Another application was preferred under

Section 231(2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 submitting that the examination of chief of

the witnesses i.e. Mukesh, Sunita, Sitaram, Rahul and Udaypuri be recorded

and thereafter, their cross-examination be recorded.

3. The learned trial Court dismissed the applications vide the

impugned order, hence, the present revision petition is preferred.

4. The application under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., 1973 is rejected on the

ground that the documents mentioned in the application under Section 91 of

Cr.P.C., 1973 are not part of the final report/charge-sheet and at the stage of

prosecution evidence, the application under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., 1973, is

not tenable.

5. The application under Section 231(2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 is rejected on

the ground that in the fact of this case, it is not required that the cross-

examination be conduced after recording the examination in chief of the

witnesses.

6. Heard.

7. Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.

8. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Suninder Sandha vs. State of

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: AMIT KUMAR

Signing time: 03-02-2026

19:29:01

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3513

3 CRR-5786-2025

NCT of Delhi and Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.5150-5151 of 2025 order

dated 02.12.2025) has considered that stage on which the application under

Section 91 of Cr.P.C., 1973 can be invoked and reiterated that the application

under section 91 of Cr.P.C., 1973 cannot be invoked before the stage of

defense. Relevant para nos.15 to 17 are being reproduced here as under:-

15. Evidently, Section 91 of the Code does not itself prescribe any

stage. The core issue remains whether invocation of power under

Section 91 of the Code by the Trial Court is as per the manner

contemplated/provided for in law. We are mindful that the

underlying case in Sarla Gupta (supra)1 concerned the Prevention

of Money- Laundering Act, 2002. It is seen that State of Orissa v

Debendra Nath Padhi, (2005) 1 SCC 568, relied upon by the High

Court, was considered by a Bench of equal strength in Sarla Gupta

(supra). On Debendra Nath Padhi (supra), the Court commented in

Sarla Gupta (supra) as under:

‘44. Thus, this Court observed that the entitlement of

the accused to seek an order under Section 91CrPC for

the