RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Government Advocate. Inspite opportu­nities having been afforded to the prose­cution to produce documentary evidence by way of memorandum prepared at the time of the speech allegedly offending provision of the D. I. R. nothing has been done. The learned Government Advocate argued that it is not necessary to keep or prepare any memorandum of offending speech. This leads that court has always to rely on the mere memory of the police officer to credit him with such a memory that he can remember each and every word of hundreds citizens making and taking speeches. It was then argued that what is given in the F. I. R. if it makes out a case it is sufficient. I do not agree. It is always open to a court to satisfy itself to call for material with the prose­cution which would be prima facie evi­dence ultimately in the case. As stated above to rely on mere memory would not be in the interest of justice.

(2.) IN the circumstances I direct that the applicant Ram Kumar to be released on bail on his furnishing adequate sureties and personal bond of the like amount to the satisfaction the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barabanki. Bail granted.