Anirudh Marik vs State of Jharkhand and Others

D.N. Prasad, J.—This revision application has been filed against the order dated 31-7.2002 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Criminal Appeal No. 164 of 1982 whereby and whereunder the learned Appellate Court rejected the petition filed by the informant-petitioner u/s 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) for bringing two public documents on the records as exhibits.

Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the learned Appellate Court committed error in rejecting the petitioner''s prayer to get those two documents exhibited which are public documents, at the stage of appeal as, according to the petitioner, both the documents are essential for arriving at the correct conclusion of the case and for the ends of justice, those public documents are essential to be exhibited.

On the other hand, Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 submitted that in the judgment of conviction, the opposite party members do not asserted about their claim over the land in question and, as such, both the documents are irrelevant and are not concerning with the matter in question.

However, both the documents are admittedly the public documents and both the parties will get an ample opportunity to raise their grievance before the learned Court below/appellate Court over the said documents, which will be considered by Court itself in accordance with law.

Since both the documents are public documents, as such, I find merit in this application and by allowing this application; the Court below is directed to get those documents exhibited on behalf of the petitioner on the one way of which the opposite parties would get an opportunity to rebut the same either at the time of argument or by any other legal method.

With this observation, the impugned order dated 31.7.2002 is hereby set aside. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.