JANARDAN SUBRAO PAI Vs. CHANDRA KAMALAKSHA PAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides for final disposal, by consent.

(2.) THE short question that arises in the present case is : whether the petitioner, who is complainant in the criminal case filed against the Respondent No. 1 for offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, was entitled to read the certified copy of the deposition given by the Respondent No. 1 in another criminal case filed by the petitioner against the co-owners of the subject land as witness in that case? The trial Court by order dated 19th June, 2000, rejected that prayer by holding that production of that document would infringe the fundamental right guaranteed to the accused Respondent No. 1 herein under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India. The order reads thus :

(3.) MR. Mundargi for the petitioner contends that the Courts below were completely misdirected in rejecting the prayer pressed into service by the petitioner for production of the deposition of Respondent No. 1 in another criminal case, where he was examined as prosecution witness, by applying Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India. According to him, the Respondent No. 1 had deposed at his free will in the said proceedings, may be pursuant to summons issued by the Court to appear as a prosecution witness. He submits that the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu reported in AIR 1961 SC 1808 : (1961 (2) Cri LJ 856) has held that only statements which are given under compulsion would receive protection by virtue of Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India and not the evidence such as the one given by the petitioner in the companion criminal case at his free will.