YUNUS KARIM BAGWAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are challenging the order dtd. 1/12/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, below Exh.71 and the order dtd. 5/1/2026 passed below Exh. 125 in Sessions Case No. 95 of 2020.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed the application below Exh.125 with a prayer not to refer to the documents filed by the prosecution on 15/3/2023 in the evidence of the witnesses during the trial. The said application was contested by the prosecution and after detail hearing, the learned trial court has rejected the application on the ground that the documents were allowed to be produced on record vide order dtd. 1/12/2023 on an application filed by the prosecution on 15/9/2023. The application with a prayer not to refer to the documents filed by the prosecution is an attempt to recall the order dtd. 1/12/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge and would amount to recalling or reviewing the order, which is specifically prohibited under Sec. 362 of Cr.P.C.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the prosecution has filed an application for production of documents after filing of charge sheet. The said documents were not part of the charge sheet and as such, could not have been allowed by the Sessions Court in view of the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the matter of Bharat alias Bhomaram Choudhary vs. State of Maharashtra (2024)DGLS Bom. 4815 and Wazid Ansari vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2024) All M.R. Cri. 3512.