MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition, under Section 397, read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is maintained by the petitioner/accused (hereinafter to be called as "the accused") , against the order, dated 05.08.2016, passed by learned Additional Session Judge-II, Shimla, in Criminal Case No. 36-S/7 of 2015, whereby an application filed by the respondent/State of H.P., under Section 311 Cr. P.C, for seeking permission to re-examine the Reader, posted in the Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chopal, District Shimla, H.P., alongwith special report, bearing signature of Dy. S.P., Chopal and Diary Register, dated 20.04.2011, has been allowed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the accused alongwith another co-accused are facing trial under Section 22 of Narcotics Drug and Psychotropic Substance Act, read with Section 34 of IPC before learned Additional Session Judge-II, Shimla and in the said Session trial, when almost all the witnesses included Investigation Officer had been examined, prosecution moved an application, under Section 311 Cr. P.C., for seeking permission to re-examine the Reader to the Office of Dy. S.P., Chopal alongwith special report and diary register, dated 20.04.2011. Wherein a prayer has been made by the prosecution that it was noticed during recording of statement of I.O. that special report of this case, placed on the case file has not been signed by Dy. S.P., Chopal.

(3.) The application is resisted and contested by the accused by filing reply, wherein it has been averred that before filing the application, prosecution has not verified the fact from the record of the Court, nor final report, under Section 173 Cr. P.C. has been examined and the present application has been moved just to delay the decision of the present case and filling the lacuna in the prosecution case. It has been further averred in the reply that the reader to Dy. S.P. Chopal has already been examined as PW-3 and alleged document has been exhibited as PW-3/A and abstract of diary register has been proved and exhibited as PW-3/B. The original record from the Office of Dy. S.P. has been produced in the Court without the signature of Dy. S.P., therefore the present application is based on wrong facts and the same deserves to be dismissed alongwith exemplary costs.