Shobhasingh Premsingh Sandhu vs The State Of Maharashtra
2013 Latest Caselaw 281 Bom

                                   1                          Cri.Appln1910.13.odt


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                               
           CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1910 OF 2013  




                                       
     Shobhasingh Premsingh Sandhu 
     Age : 68 years, Occ : Retired, 
     R/o Plot No. 8, Limyewadi Sindhi Colony, 
     Aurangabad and R/o Nanded. 




                                      
                                                          ..APPLICANT 
          -VERSUS- 

     1.   The State of Maharashtra 
          Through Principal Secretary, 




                             
          Home Department, Mantralaya, 
          Mumbai. 

     2.
                 
          Ajitsingh S/o Babusingh Mail 
          Age : 44 years, Occ : Business, 
          Gurudwara Chourasta, 
                
          Near Gurudwara Primary School, 
          Gurudwara Road, Nanded. 
                                                      ..RESPONDENTS 
                ...
     Advocate for Applicant : Mr. P.R. Patil 
      


     APP for Respondent No.1 : Mr. G.R. Ingole
     Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. A.A. Mukhedkar
   



                ...

                             CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.

Dated: December 05, 2013

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

Heard the learned counsel for the

parties. By consent, admitted and heard finally.

2. There is a dispute on the issue, whether

the xerox copy of the cheque, which has been

2 Cri.Appln1910.13.odt

marked as Article `A' should be marked as an

Exhibit or not. According to the applicant, who

is the original complainant, it should be,

whereas, according to the respondent no.2, who is

the original accused, it should not be.

3. In the course of arguments, the learned

counsel for the applicant submits that all that he

wants is that the cheque should be tentatively

marked as an Exhibit, subject to the objection to

such marking thereof, as has been raised by the

respondent no.2 i.e. the original accused. The

learned counsel for the applicant submits that all

the relevant questions such as `whether, the xerox

copy is a secondary evidence of the original

cheque' or `whether, the same has been properly

proved,' may be kept open, to be decided by the

trial Court at the conclusion of the trial.

4. This would be consistent with the

Practice Directions issued by the Supreme Court of

India in the case of Bipin Shantilal Panchal V/s

3 Cri.Appln1910.13.odt

State of Gujarat and another {(2001) 3 Supreme

Court Cases 1}.

5. The application is partly allowed.

The learned Magistrate is directed to

mark the xerox copy of the cheque (Exhibit `A')

tentatively as an Exhibit, keeping the question of

admissibility and/or proof thereof open, to be

decided at the conclusion of the trial in

accordance with the directions given by the

Supreme Court of India in the case of Bipin

Panchal (supra).

6. The application is disposed of

accordingly.

Sd/-

( ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. ) ***

sga/-