JAGMOHANSINGH ALIAS CHHOTU MAHIPALSING Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) * * * *

(2.) While deciding about the age of the prosecutrix it appears that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has put reliance on certain documents which have been brought on record at the instance of the Court. There is an order at Exhibit 56 dated 9/08/1982 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under sec. 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 Pursuant to the said order witness summons were issued to Bakul Primary Gujarati Shala Vadodara Nagar Prathmik Shikshan Samiti Vadodara and Municipal Prathmik Shala No. 6 Ahmed- abad. Thereafter application Exhibit 57 was presented on behalf of the appellant and others to stay the proceedings to enable the appellant and others to go in revision against the said order. The same was granted and time was given upto 16-8-1982. At Exhibit 58 the appel- lant and others had preferred another application praying that the aforesaid order dated 9-8-1982 be set aside. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has disallowed the said application as per his order dated 20/08/1982. Thereafter in answer to the witness summons documents had been produced and the same have also been taken on record for the reasons stated in the judgment. It is pertinent to note however that after the said documents were taken on record no oppor- tunity had been given to the accused to make any further statement in connection with those documents if they wanted to nor have they been asked as to whether the accused would like to lead any evidence in that connection. The judgment passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge shows that in deciding the case he has relied upon additional documents other than those on record. The learned advocate for the appellant has therefore contended that in the first place it was not open to the learned Additional City Sessions Judge to pass such an order under sec. 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) Sec. 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under :-