JOGENDRA SINGH Vs. C.B.I.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 10.12.2013. The application submitted by the prosecution was accepted. A revision petition against the said order by the petitioner was dismissed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner submits that after registration of case, investigation was made by the CBI followed by charge sheet. After framing of charges, prosecution led evidence and by the time of submission of application, 22 witnesses had been examined. An application thereupon was submitted by the prosecution to allow them to produce certain documents without specifying and giving details of those documents and reasons for non -production at the appropriate stage. The application aforesaid was allowed affecting right of the petitioner. He has already disclosed his defence while cross -examining 22 witnesses, hence, it will affect his right of defence. The permission to take documents on record at a later stage can be permitted but not a stage when 22 witnesses have already been examined. In the light of the aforesaid, application submitted by the CBI was allowed casually.

(3.) PER contra, learned counsel for non -petitioner submits that application discloses the reasons as to why evidence could not be produced earlier. During the course of investigation, articles were sealed in the presence of two witnesses. A list was prepared but out of it, only item No. 2 of the list was submitted along with charge sheet leaving other articles. It was due to bona fide mistake. The witnesses to prove that material has yet to be examined by the prosecution, thus even if 22 witnesses have been examined, it is not going to affect defence of the petitioner. The witnesses concerned to the material would be examined now. The petitioner would be having opportunity to cross -examine them thoroughly. He further submits that application is not for acceptance of new evidence, rather it is part of investigation and was sealed in the presence of two persons. The doubt has been raised about condition of the evidence, though material has already been produced before the court below and is lying intact.