9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., which the revisionist, by way of another application, prayed to be read as moved under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. This Court has carefully perused the said application. The revisionist has failed to even plead the necessary ingredients of Section 391 Cr.P.C. There is no averment in the application that the document i.e. specimen signature sought to be relied upon by the revisionist is necessary in the present case. Further, there is no pleading that not summoning the specimen signatures from the bank for verification by handwriting expert in the appeal would lead to failure of justice. This court is of the considered view that the revisionist had not filed any additional evidence by moving an application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. Though he could not succeed in this effort but he became successful in delaying the disposal of appeal - Revision dismissed. - Criminal Revision No. 80 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 25-2-2020 - Lok Pal Singh, J. For the Appellant : Sudhir Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Sandeep Tandon, Deputy Advocate General, D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate and Aditya Singh, Advocate as Amicus Curiae. JUDGMENT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012 at P.S. Kotdwar stating that his bag has been lost somewhere wherein there were some important documents like passport, driving license, cheque book, pan card, etc. and there were also some cheques related to his son's account in Canara Bank but the applicant has not produced any documents along with the application so as to prove that actually his bag a lost on 25.08.2012. 3. Initially this Court has passed an order dated 10.10.2019 directing the trial court not to pronounce the judgment till the next date of listing. Thereafter, this Court appointed Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate as amicus curiae to the assist the Court on the issue as to whether an application of the convict/appellant is maintainable to adduce the additional evidence in an appeal? 4. Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist, Mr. Sandeep Tandon, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand and mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 as well as Mr. Aditya Singh, learned Amicus Curiae. 5. On the issue as to whether the application moved by the accused under Section 391 of Cr.P.C., to lead additional evidence is maintainable or not, Mr. Aditya Singh, le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white-collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national economy and national interest. 31. In Rambhau v. State of Maharashtra, (2001) 4 SCC 759, a larger Bench of this Court held as under: (SCC p. 762, para 4) 4. Incidentally, Section 391 forms an exception to the general rule that an appeal must be decided on the evidence which was before the trial court and the powers being an exception shall always have to be exercised with caution and circumspection so as to meet the ends of justice. Be it noted further that the doctrine of finality of judicial proceedings does not stand annulled or affected in any way by reason of exercise of power under Section 391 since the same avoids a de novo trial. It is not to fill up the lacuna but to subserve the ends o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as a security for the deposit collected by Nalinam Finance, it is the bounden duty of the petitioner to prove the same by examining the partners of Nalinam Finance. The reception of additional evidence can be entrained when there is likelihood of failure of justice. It is obvious that the cardinal principle of the Indian Evidence Act is that the best evidence has to be brought in. 28. This court is satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for taking additional evidence in the appellate stage under section 391 of Cr.P.C. The appellate Court has not properly adverted to the essential ingredient of Section 391 of Cr.P.C., if it thinks additional evidence to be necessary . These words in the Section contemplates a wide power to the appellate Court to weed out the infirmities and irregularities. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that in order to render complete justice, it is just and necessary to allow the petitioner to lead additional evidence and also marking of documents. 29. For the reasons stated above, this Court comes to the conclusion that the petitions filed by the petitioner before the appellate Court seeking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only in exceptional suitable cases where the court is satisfied that directing additional evidence would serve the interests of justice . That being the position, this Court is of the view that the application filed by the revisionist/accused under Section 391 of Cr.P.C., is maintainable. Now, this Court has to see whether the appellate court has committed illegality in rejecting the said application. 9. In the case at hand, initially the revisionist had moved an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., which the revisionist, by way of another application, prayed to be read as moved under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. This Court has carefully perused the said application. The revisionist has failed to even plead the necessary ingredients of Section 391 Cr.P.C. There is no averment in the application that the document i.e. specimen signature sought to be relied upon by the revisionist is necessary in the present case. Further, there is no pleading that not summoning the specimen signatures from the bank for verification by handwriting expert in the appeal would lead to failure of justice. 10. That apart, a perusal of record reveals that the revisionist had full opportunity and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
