LAXMI NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF RAJSHTAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Assailing the order dated 19.6.2006, counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the non-putting the report of Central Food Laboratory to the accused clearly amounted to an illegality in trial and the learned Judge had no jurisdiction to permit the said lacuna to be filled in by remanding the matter to the trial Judge. It is submitted, that the learned appellate Judge should have acquitted the accused instead of remanding the matter to the trial court.

(3.) Per contra, learned public prosecutor has supported the judgment of the appellate Judge and has submitted that the appellate Judge was perfectly justified in remanding the matter back. It has been submitted that the accused could not be given the benefit of technical lapse occasioned by non-putting of the report of the Central Food Laboratory in the statements under Section 313 CrPC.