MALGODE ALIAS MALGODAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned A.G.A.

(2.) This revision has been directed against the order dated 28.09.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Siddharth Nagar, permitting and opportunity to the prosecution to prove a first information report (NCR) and the related G.D. of the concerned police station under the provisions of Section 311 Cr.P.C.

(3.) As background facts of the case reveal this petition of prosecution (complainant) was moved before the court below on 13.7.2004 but no order was passed thereon by the Trial Judge and instead the kept it reserved for disposal after closure of the hearing of the case. The evidence of the prosecution as well as statement of the accused in the trial had been recorded and thereafter while hearing the parties during the final arguments, the court below found that the summoning of the concerned police station constable to prove the aforesaid documents was necessary for proper dispensation of justice in the case. This document is the first information report, which was lodged at the police station naming the deceased Ajaz Ahmed and others on the complainant's side as accused in that case and which was registered as N.C.R. No. 143 of 1999 dated 04.12.1999. The accused had also moved a petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned vide their application dated 03.01.2000 for obtaining a direction to the police under Section 155/2 of the Cr.P.C. to investigate the whole matter. But the accused persons, while formulating their defence in this trial, have on the contrary totally denied the alleged incident and as such, the version of the accused which appears in their F.I.R. referred to above, was sought to be recorded by summoning those documents and by proving it through the Constable of the police station.