JAIRAM MANDAVI Vs. STATE OF C. G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed present petition challenging the order dtd. 7/3/2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge First Track Court, Surajpur in Sessions Trial No.82/18 (State of CG Vs. Jairam Mandavi) by which the application of the petitioner for production of statements of witnesses namely Lalit Ekka, Muneshwari Paikara, Kunti Singh, Poonam Bhagat which have been recorded by the investigating authority at the time of investigation but when the prosecution has submitted final report before learned Judge the same was not part of the final report.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that during course of cross-examination of Mr. B. L. Kehri who was investigating officer in the cross-examination, it has been brought on record that the statements of Head Constable Lalit Ekka, Women Constable Muneshwari Paikara, their statements have been recorded but it is not the part of the final report. He would further submit that both the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case, therefore, their statements have not become part of the final report.

(3.) The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the application by recording a finding that a document which is not part of the final report cannot be directed for production of the same, though it may be part of the diary. He has further observed that prosecution shall place the documents which are in their favour and this Court cannot direct that the prosecution to file documents which are the part of the case diary.