KULBUL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed against the order dated 5 -9 -2000 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Varanasi whereby rejecting the application moved by the revisionists for adducing additional evidence.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionists contended that there were cross cases. The case filed from the side of the revisionists resulted in acquittal of the accused of that case, while the revisionists were convicted and sentenced and they filed the appeal before the lower appellate Court, which is pending.

(3.) THE learned lower appellate Court has rightly upheld that to fill up the lacuna, additional evidence cannot be admitted at the stage of appeal. It cannot be held that the said injury report, F.I.R. etc. were not in the knowledge of the accused - appel ­lants particularly when the cross cases were also proceeding. It was for the ac ­cused -appellants to get those injury report, F.I.R. etc. filed in the case. It was also required from the appellant that those injury report be got proved by the medical officer.