Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1553 (RAJ)

Bhola @ Yadvinder Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2012-07-13

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2012
Hon'ble MEHTA, J.—The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 15.5.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Srikaranpur, District Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No. 17/11 whereby the application filed by the petitioner accused under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. for summoning of the statements of the certain witnesses has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contents that the petitioner is facing trial for the offences punishable with capital punishment as such, the statements of all the witnesses, who have been examined by the Investigating Officer were required to be called by the Court so that the accused can have a proper opportunity of proving his defence. He prays that the impugned under whereby the application filed by the petitioner for summoning of the statements of certain witnesses has been rejected, deserves to be quashed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner and submits that the prosecution is only under an obligation by virtue of Sec. 173 Cr.P.C. to file the statements of such witnesses on record which it relies upon. He submits that apart from the relied upon witnesses, the statements of the other witnesses who have been examined during the course of the examination are neither relevant nor required to be filed along with the result of investigation as per Section 173 Cr.P.C. 4. Upon the consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar and after going through the order impugned, it is evident that the witnesses, the statements whereof were sought to be summoned are not relied upon witnesses of the prosecution. As per Section 173 Sub-clause 5 Cr.P.C. only the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of all the persons whom the prosecution purposes to examine are to be filed along with the result of investigation. As per Section 173 Sub-clause 5 Cr.P.C. only the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of all the persons whom the prosecution purposes to examine are to be filed along with the result of investigation. The accused is entitled to receive the copies of such statements by virtue of Section 207 Cr.P.C. Section 173(5) Cr.P.C. reads as under:- "When such report is in respect of a case to which section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report- (a) all documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation; (b) the statements recorded under section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses." Section 207 Cr.P.C. reads as under:- "207. Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents.- In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following. (i) The police report; (ii) The first information report recorded under Section 154 (iii) The statements recorded under sub-section (3) of section 161 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses, excluding there from any part in regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub-section (6) of section 173. (iv) The confessions and statements, if any, recorded under Section 164; (v) Any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub-section (5) of section 173. Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused: Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in Clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in court." 5. Thus on a consideration of the aforesaid two provisions of Cr.P.C., which are relevant in relation to supply of copy of documents to the accused upon filing of chargesheet, it becomes apparent that only statements of those witnesses, which the prosecution choses to rely upon are to be filed along with the chargesheet. The prosecution is not under an obligation to file the statements of any other witness, who might have been examined during the course of the investigation. 6. Even at the stage of consideration of charges under Section 227 Cr.P.C. also only the documents which are filed along with the result of investigation under Section 173 Cr.P.C. can be considered as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Debendra Nath Pandhi reported in (2003) 2 SCC 711 . Thus the prayer made by the accused in this case that he may be provided with the statements of the other witnesses apart from the relied upon witnesses cannot be accepted. If at all the accused desires to examine the other witnesses who were examined in the investigation but are not relied upon then he has a liberty to do so in his defence. However, the statements of such witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. cannot even be utilised for confronting the witnesses particularly when the accused himself calls the witness in defence. Thus, there cannot be any justification or utility of summoning on record the statements of the witnesses, who are not the relied upon witnesses of the prosecution recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 7. Resultantly, misc. petition being bereft of any force is hereby rejected.