Mannem Srimannarayana Prasad vs The State Of A.P., Rep., By Its Spl. Pp For ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6189 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Mannem Srimannarayana Prasad vs The State Of A.P., Rep., By Its Spl. Pp For ... on 27 December, 2023

      HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

                   Crl.A.Nos.107 and 118 of 2015

                          PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.   DATE                                 ORDER                          OFFICE
No.                                                                        NOTE

      27.12.2023    AVRB, J

                           While perusing the record for the last two
                   days to prepare the judgment, firstly this Court
                   found that the placing of record with necessary
                   flaps so as to identify the exhibit series is not in
                   proper order.     However, this Court made an
                   attempt to set right the record.


                           While perusing the record, it is found
                   that   the   prosecution    exhibited   M.O.2-C.D.,
                   dated 12.08.2010 into which conversation from
                   the digital voice recorder was transferred and
                   M.O.3-C.D.,     dated    13.08.2010     into   which
                   conversation from the digital voice recorder was
                   transferred. The prosecution exhibited M.O.9-a
                   sealed cover containing a CD and it is said to
                   have contained the questioned voices of P.W.1,
                   Accused No.1 and Accused No.2; M.O.10- a
                   sealed cover containing a CD which is said to
                   have contained questioned voices of P.W.1 and
                   Accused      No.2;      M.O.11-a   sealed      cover
                   containing a CD which is said to have contained
                 2



specimen voice of P.W.1; M.O.12-a sealed
cover containing a CD which is said to have
contained specimen voice of A.1 and further
M.O.13-a sealed cover containing a CD which is
said to have contained specimen voice of
Accused No.2.


      During the course of arguments neither
learned    counsel   for   appellants     nor    the
representative of the learned Deputy Solicitor
General for respondent clarified anything as to

whether it is possible to hear the conversation in CD into CD Player by this Court. When the prosecution exhibited Ex.P.10, Ex.P.10(A), Ex.P.10(B), Ex.P.10(C) and Ex.P.11 said to be the transcription relating to conversation, Court has to ensure the correctness of the transcription if necessary by getting playing of the CD. As both sides did not canvass anything on this aspect and the case of the prosecution also based upon the aforesaid Material Objects and Exhibits, it is further desirable to hear both the counsels for the appellant as well as the learned Deputy Solicitor General.

In the meantime, the Registry is directed to set right the record with flaps to identify each exhibit as well as Material Objects.

Delete the matter under the caption of Reserved for Judgment, in view of the aforesaid reasons and post before the appropriate Bench having the provision as per roster, within two weeks from this day.

_________ AVRB, J

PGR