(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
(2.) The very short point is involved in this petition about production of Station Diary Entries and A.D. papers in the proceedings to enable the accused to put his defence. The petitioner-accused is facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner-accused has moved an application (Exhibit 36) requiring Investigating Agency to produce Station Diary Entries dated 16.07.2017 and 18.07.2017 which was later on corrected as of 16.07.2017 and 17.07.2017. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has refused to accept request by stating that in view of Clause 3 to Section 172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') it is privileged communication and therefore cannot be summoned. As regards to A.D. Enquiry papers are concerned, it is expressed that they were already forwarded by Police alongwith the charge-sheet.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the accused has right to make use of the previous statements of the witnesses for the purpose of contradiction and for impeaching the credit of the witnesses. According to him, some statements recorded during A.D. Enquiry are not produced. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that whatever statements recorded in A.D. Enquiry are part of charge-sheet, and therefore, there is no necessity to issue further directions. Though learned Counsel for the petitioner denied about supply of copies of statements recorded in A.D. Enquiry, one cannot presume that some more statements might have recorded in A.D. Enquiry of which copies are not supplied. However, whatever statements recorded during A.D. Enquiry have to be supplied to the accused, if not already, and to that effect direction can be issued.