SACHIN JINDAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision petition, petitioner assails the order dated 03.09.2019 passed by Additional Session Judge in SC No. 58093/2016 arising out of FIR No. 278/2014 registered under Sections 302 / 370 / 374 / 34 IPC at P.S. Model Town, whereby his prayer seeking a copy of video cassette has been rejected.

(2.) In the present case, the prosecution had examined Mr. Naresh Kumar Rana as PW3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has handed over a copy of the testimony of the said witness, which is taken on record. PW3 is a Videographer by profession. He had done the videography in respect of the post-mortem examination conducted on the body of the deceased. The video cassette containing the above videography was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/1. During his deposition, the aforementioned video cassette was taken out from the judicial file and shown to the witness, who identified the same as the cassette which was prepared by him and seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/1. The said cassette was exhibited as Ex. P1.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that he moved an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall Dr. M.K. Wahi (PW13) and Dr. Mohit Gupta (PW27), who conducted the Post-Mortem, which was allowed vide order dated 01.07.2019. The petitioner also moved an application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. read with Sections 173 and 207 Cr.P.C., whereby it was prayed that a copy of the aforementioned video cassette be supplied to him as the same would be just and necessary for the cross-examination of the witnesses who have been recalled. The said application, however, came to be dismissed vide impugned order dated 03.09.2019 on the ground that when the said video cassette was exhibited the witness was not cross- examined. It was also observed that no objection was raised either at the stage of compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. or when the said cassette was proved by the concerned witness.