Manjeet Singh @ Manna v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRR No.2917 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 05, 2018 Manjeet Singh @ Manna

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Fariad Singh Virk, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Pawan Sharda, Sr.DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The present revision has been filed by the petitioner against respondent State of Punjab, challenging the order dated 10.08.2018 passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana, vide which two applications were decided.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that two applications were filed, one regarding re-examination of SI Mukhtiar Singh, which was dismissed vide impugned order and second application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for

CRR No.2917 of 2018 -2placing on record three copies/sheets of sample seal slips prepared on the day of recovery, three copies of form No.M-29 and three sheets of sample seal slips prepared during inventory proceedings, which was allowed and these documents were ordered to be placed on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly argued that the documents, which are allowed to be placed on record, are forged one and prepared later on by the prosecution. Otherwise, why these documents were not placed on record earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he has no grievance with the order dismissing the application for reexamination of SI Mukhtiar Singh and did not press that part of the revision. At this stage, the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, have no merits.

There is nothing on the record to show that these documents were not prepared on the day of occurrence or prepared later on. Otherwise also, the Court, in the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., has simply allowed placing on record of these documents. When the Investigating Officer or any other witness will prove these documents, the petitioner will get the opportunity to cross-examine that witness. The present petitioner will also get opportunity to lead evidence to rebut these documents. Furthermore, at the appropriate stage, the defence counsel can also show to the Court if these documents were not found executed/prepared during the investigation. Sample seal and form No.M-29 might have been sent at the time of sending the samples to FSL etc.

As the documents are necessary for the just decision of the case and to do substantial justice between the parties, therefore, no illegality has been committed while allowing the application for placing on record the documents. The impugned order dated 10.08.

CRR No.2917 of 2018 -3Special Court, Ludhiana, is correct, as per law and does not require any interference from this Court.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present revision petition, the same is dismissed.

October 05, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No