DR. DEVENDER SINGH Vs. NAVDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By virtue of the instant petition preferred under Sec. 482Cr.P.C. petitioner has sought quashing of impugned order dated 14.09.2015(Annexure P-6) passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dabwali, whereby an application moved by the prosecution under Sec. 311 Crimial P.C. has been partly allowed but revision petition preferred by the prosecution has been declined in respect of production of laptop/case property in the court.

(2.) A close scrutiny of the impugned order transpires that the laptop was recovered from accused-respondent No.1-Navdeep Singh during investigation of the case registered against him and its production in the court was necessary for providing full opportunity of being heard to the prosecution. Due to certain reasons, prosecution failed to produce the said laptop during the period, the case was fixed for prosecution evidence. It can be termed to be a lapse or omission on the part of the prosecution, but for that lapse or omission, the complainant cannot be made to suffer.

(3.) In other words, the accused also cannot drive any benefit for the non-production of the case property/laptop in the court. The production of the other evidence by the prosecution could be well supported from the material available in the laptop to bring truth to the fore and to punish the guilty person. Moreover, the discretion provided under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C.has to be exercised judiciously and this court is of the considered view that it would be fitness of things that the laptop be produced in the Court and it is only thereafter it would bring some fruitful result.