KRISHNA SAHEBRAO PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Application is under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short "Cr.P.C.") Notice to Respondent. Learned A.P.P. waives service for Respondent. Heard finally learned counsel for the Applicant and learned A.P.P. for State.

(2.) In this matter, the trial Court has, by order dated 31st December, 2013, found that original statements recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C." were not available in Nazarat. The trial Court, after going through the record, found that original statements of witnesses were not traceable. After hearing the accused, the trial Court, relying on the case of Prithi Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 1989 AIR(SC) 702, held that carbon copy mechanically prepared while preparing original, will be original and has treated carbon copies of statements available on record, as primary evidence.

(3.) Now the learned counsel for the Applicant is submitting that in the matter of Prithi Chand , which has been relied on by the subordinate Courts, the facts were different. In the matter referred, carbon copy was made by one uniform process of certificate of doctor given in discharge of professional duty and the lady doctor herself was not available and it was found that it would not be possible to secure her presence without undue delay and therefore the prosecution was permitted to prove the certificate through another doctor who was conversant with handwriting of the said lady doctor. According to the learned counsel, in those circumstances, carbon copy was treated as primary evidence.