Dr. Umakant S/O. Janardan Anekar vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7263 Bom

Judgment

                                                                      apl390.17 1

                                        1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

         CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.390 OF 2017

Dr. Umakant s/o Janardan Anekar,
Aged about 66 years, Occupation Ex-Civil
Surgeon, R/o Khamla Road, Nagpur.          ..... Applicant.

                                 ::   VERSUS   ::

State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station, Chandrapur.             ..... Non-applicant.

================================================================
          Shri R.L. Khapre, Counsel for the applicant.
          Shri R.S. Nayak, Addl.P.P. for the State.
================================================================


                                CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J.

                                DATE    : SEPTEMBER 18, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard

finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties.

2. An application below Exhibit 372 was filed by the

.....2/-

Judgment

apl390.17 1

applicant, who is an accused in Regular Criminal Case No.448

of 2004. The said application is under Section 91 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973. By filing the said application,

the applicant sought production of documents, which

according to the applicant are required for cross-examination.

Those documents are mentioned at Annexure-15 of page

No.113 of the compilation. The said application is rejected by

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 21.1.2017.

A revision was carried against the said order bearing

Criminal Revision Application No.20 of 2017 which is also

rejected.

3. Learned counsel Shri R.L. Khapre for the

applicant submits that for effecting the cross-examination of

the prosecution witnesses, documents mentioned at

Annexure-15 of page No.113 of the compilation are absolutely

.....3/-

Judgment

apl390.17 1

necessary.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri R.S.

Nayak for the State points out that during the course of the

investigation, none of the documents are seized by the

prosecution nor those documents are relied by the

prosecution.

5. Further, perusal of Annexure-15 at page No.113 of

the compilation shows that the documents, which are sought

to be supplied, are either publication by the Government of

Maharashtra or Circulars issued by the Government. The

reasoning given by learned Magistrate, that those documents

are easily available, is correct. Further, for effecting the

cross-examination, if the applicant wants a particular

document, he cannot force the prosecution to file certain

documents on record.

.....4/-

Judgment

apl390.17 1

6. Hence, the criminal application is rejected.

Interim order granted by this Court stands vacated.

JUDGE

!! BRW !!

...../-