LAWS(P&H)-2015-12-560

DESH RAJ Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

Decided On December 23, 2015
DESH RAJ Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition the petitioner has challenged the order whereby the trial Court had declined the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and then in revision that order was upheld.

(2.) On 06.07.2015 the evidence of the prosecution was closed since that was the second/third last opportunity and the matter was adjourned for 20.07.2015. It is on that date that for the first time the petitioner moved an application seeking examination of himself as witness and to produce some documents on record. Even copies of those documents were not placed on record. It was in these circumstances that the Courts below found the inaction of the petitioner for over two years and his omission to even annexed the copies of the documents which he wants to produce on record, to be a factor which disentitles him from leading additional evidence. Today learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the following judgments:-

(3.) There can be no quarrel with the proposition which has been laid down in all judgments that the Court has the power to seek any evidence which may be necessary to decide the real controversy in the case but to my mind the omissions/inaction in the present case disentitle the petitioner from such relief. It may be noticed that the production of documents under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has to be tempered against the basic requirement of speedy trial and also the processual requirement of placing on record the evidence sought to be produced as additional evidence so that the Court could determine whether it is in fact necessary or not.