KARUPPATHAL Vs. PALANISAMI GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT: Cr. M. P. No. 6119 of 1986 is a petition by karuppathal, examined as P. W. 4 in S. C. No. 137 of 1985 on the file of the Court of Sessions, Coimbatore . This application has been filed for transfer of S. C. No. 137 of 1986 from the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Coimbatore to any other Court of competent jurisdiction, in the interest of justice. Certain allegations have been made against the presiding Judge, in the affidavit filed along with the petition.

(2.) CR. M. P. No. 6123 of 1986 is an application filed by the state represented by the Inspector of Police, District CRime Branch, Coimbatore rural under Sec. 482, CR. P. C. for directions to the Court of Sessions, coimbatore to delete from evidence Exs. D1 to D3 since the procedure adopted by the trial court is contrary to the directions, of this Court, made in cr. M. P. No. 10180 of 1985.

(3.) INSPITE of the specific observations of this Court, extracted above, in this petition, the prosecution has taken up a stand that to the surprise of the prosecution it was found while P. W. I was cross-examined that copies of the statements recorded by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, during his enquiry, had been furnished to the respondents herein and P. W. 1 was cross-examined with reference to the aforesaid statements. Similarly it was also found that statements recorded by the Deputy Superintendent of Police from p. Ws. 3 and 4 had also been furnished to the respondents and these witnesses were also cross-examined with reference to those statements. A grievance has been made by the prosecution that though the Public Prosecutor had drawn the attention of the Principal Sessions Judge that this Court had dismissed cr. M. P. No. 10180 of 1985 and as such the statements ought not to have been furnished to the respondents and could not form part of the records of the trial, the trial Judge, had the above statements marked as Exs. D1 and D3.