VEER SINGH Vs. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is directed against the order dtd. 17/5/2025, passed by learned Special Judge (CBI Court), Shimla (learned Trial Court), vide which an application filed under Sec. 311 of Cr.P.C. was allowed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that a trial is pending before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 120-B of the Indian Peal Code (IPC) and Ss. 7 and 13(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act. During the pendency of the trial, an application under Sec. 311 read with Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C. was filed by the CBI seeking permission to recall Amitosh Kumar (PW5) along with documents. It was asserted that Amitosh Kumar (PW5) produced the certificate under Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The witness did not produce the certificate under Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The original SD cards were on record and were duly exhibited during the prosecution's evidence. It was necessary to issue directions to Amitosh Kumar (PW5) to produce the certificate under Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. Production of the certificate would not cause any prejudice to the accused. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be allowed and the witness be recalled.

(3.) The application was opposed by filing a reply taking preliminary objections regarding the application having been filed to delay the trial and fill up the lacuna. It was asserted that the witness never stated before the Court that he had prepared Ex.P4 and sealed it. The certificate has to be prepared at the time of the preparation of the copy/document. The application does not mention that any certificate was prepared while preparing the copy of the record. The certificate was not relied on in the charge sheet, and it cannot be prepared at this juncture. Therefore, it was prayed that the application be dismissed.