SHER KHAN Vs. JITENDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard finally, with the consent of the parties.

(2.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. against the order dtd. 21/12/2023 passed in Criminal Revision No.89/2023 by Sessions Judge, Ratlam whereby, the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class in Criminal Case No.3053/2014 dtd. 29/11/2023, allowing the complainant to lead secondary evidence in respect of a photocopy of the agreement, has been affirmed.

(3.) In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner and the respondent No.1 Jitendra entered into an agreement on 1/10/2010, for sale of the land bearing Survey No.1059/1 ad-measuring 0.020 hectares for a consideration of Rs.11,64,000.00. According to this agreement, the sale deed was to be executed on or before 1/2/2011, and on 19/5/2011, i.e., after expiry of the period as provided in the aforesaid agreement, the petitioner executed a registered sale deed in favour of Nathulal and Bhagwatilal, which led the respondent No.1 Jitendra to file a private complaint, which was registered as Criminal Case No.RCT 3053/2014, in which, at the time of recording of evidence, the respondent No.1 by filing an application under Sec. 65 of the Indian Evidence Act tried to exhibit the photocopy of the agreement dtd. 1/10/2010 contending that the same may be accepted as secondary evidence of the original agreement as the original one is lost and since he had already given a photocopy of the same to the concerned police station, he has obtained the photocopy of the said agreement from the said police station under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The application was allowed by the learned Judge of the Trial Court vide order dtd. 29/11/2023, and a criminal revision preferred against the aforesaid order, before the District Court, has also been rejected, affirming the aforesaid order. Hence, this petition.