LAKHPAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A. B. Srivastava, J. In a Sessions trial pending since 1981 (85 of 1981) in the Court of Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly, the proceedings have been stalled since several years on a dispute regarding supplying copies of certain documents, which has brought the accused persons to this Court. In the application under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C. moved initially on 20-10-1989, the prayer was to direct the prosecution to supply copies of two dying declarations, various recorded or unrecorded statements under Section 161, Cr. P. C, and certain General Diary entries. In another application moved subsequently on 18-1-1993 and made part of the original proceedings, prayer has been made to direct an enquiry to be made to ascertain whether or not the G. D. dated 23-11-1980 and the Duty Register of the same date of P. S. Qila, District Bareilly, has been weeded out, and to direct copy thereof to be supplied, before the trial starts.

(2.) WHILE staying the proceedings certain orders were passed to direct the documents required under Section 207, Cr. P. C. to be supplied and to proceed with the case after such supply has been made.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly is directed to hold an enquiry by examining, the concerned officials, having the custody of General Diary and Duty Register dated 23-11- lvso of P. S. Qila, District Bareilly or the duplicate copy thereof, the weeding register, and other relevant records, if any, as to whether the said documents have been weeded out or it still exist. In the enquiry which will be summary, the accused shall be entitled to cross-examine the witnesses examined with reference only to the question of weeding. Such enquiry shall be conducted and completed expeditously within six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is present ed before the court concerned. In case the document is not proved to have been weeded out, copies thereof shall be directed to be supplied to the accused persons. In case it is not so done or it is found to have been weeded out in breach of rules or any orders of the court, it will be permissible to the defence to plead for appropriate inference under the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act. The evidence of the Head Constable writer and the Investigating Officer in the case shall be recorded only after the enquiry as stated above is complet ed by the Presiding Officer, so that the accused persons may be in a position to refer the documents, if they are still in existence, to those witnesses in cross-examination. The recording of the statements of other witnesses however need not await the aforesaid enquiry.