REETU SETIA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two revisions filed against the order dated 01.06.2015, vide which the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bathinda partly allowed the application filed by the accused. Crl. Revision No.2383 of 2015 has been filed by the accused Reetu Setia whereas Crl. Revision No.3249 of 2015 has been filed by the complainant Jyoti Chugh.

(2.) It is necessary to give the backdrop. An FIR was registered on the statement made by the prosecutrix. The police had filed the challan. Accused Reetu Setia approached this Court for quashing of the FIR. However, the petition was withdrawn and liberty was granted to the petitioner to raise all the pleas before the trial Court. At the trial an application was filed by accused Reetu Setia seeking to summon the attendance register and the CCTV footage of 12.09.2013 from State Bank of India, Bathinda at the stage of framing of charge. The prayer made by the accused was that these documents would prove her innocence.

(3.) The claim of the accused-petitioner was that she had been falsely implicated and she was not involved and she was on duty in the bank on 12.09.2013. She wanted to summon the attendance register and the CCTV footage of the bank. The trial Court rejected the prayer of summoning the CCTV footage, relying upon the judgment in Debendra Nath Padhi, 2005 1 RCR(Cri) 297. However, it allowed the accused to place the attendance register on the record.