Radhesingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14331 MP

                                                               1
                               IN       THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                 ON THE 31 st OF AUGUST, 2023
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 17764 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RADHESINGH S/O SURPAL MEHDA, AGED ABOUT 60
                           YEAR S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE GRAM AMBI
                           DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI AVINASH KUMAR KHARE - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION AMBUAA
                           DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI BHUWAN DESHMUKH - G.A.)

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

This is petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging

the order dated 11.4.2023 passed in ST No.13/2023 for commission of offence u/S.302 of IPC by II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Alirajpur. By the impugned order the learned court below has rejected the application to accept pen drive and to to cross examine PW.2 with the pen drive regarding spot of the incident on the basis of the pen drive.

2. Counsel for State raised the two objections. Firstly, the present petition is not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but in fact it is a

Signature Not Verified petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order Signed by: VARGHESE MATHEW Signing time: 31-08-2023 18:00:44

passed by II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Alirajpur. Considering the aforesaid objection, the present petition is treated under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for State also raised preliminary objection that co-accused persons Nihal Singh and Vishal have already challenged the same impugned order u/S.482 of Cr.P.C in M.Cr.C. No.26865/2023. The said M.Cr.C was dismissed by order dated 7.7.2023.

3. Counsel for petitioner submits that as per the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Gopal Krishna Vs. State of Kerala in SLP (Cri.) No.10189/2020 dated 29.11.2019, the evidence of pen drive is also included within the definition of evidence and he be allowed to cross examine the witness

PW.2 with pen drive regarding spot of the incident.

4. After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration that the same impugned order was challenged by the co-accused persons Nihalsingh and Vishal, the same has been dismissed. The trial court has rejected the application mainly on the ground that the map has been prepared by Patvari and the evidence of the Investigating Officer and Patvari are yet to be recorded. The petitioner shall have opportunity to cross examine the Patvari and Investigating Officer in respect of incident spot. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. The similar petition u./S.482 of Cr.P.C has already been rejected. The petition is dismissed.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE VM

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARGHESE MATHEW Signing time: 31-08-2023 18:00:44