AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prafulla C. Pant
Heard. By means of this petition moved u/s 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.01.2012, passed by 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in Criminal Appeal No. 81 of 2009, whereby said court has rejected the application moved by the petitioner u/s 391 Cr.P.C.
Secion 391 of Cr.P.C, empowers the appellate court to take further evidence or to direct that further evidence be taken. It is settled principle of law that the power under the Section should not be exercised lightly or in routine manner. If the power is exercised lightly, it will go against the spirit of fair and speedy trial of the case. Not only this, if the application u/s 391 of Cr.P.C. is allowed, without sufficient reason, it would encourage winning over of the witnesses and manufacturing the evidence.
The appellate court, while dismissing the application u/s 391 of Cr.P.C, has discussed at length that the document sought to be filed at the appellate stage was throughout in possession and knowledge of the appellant, and as such, there was no reason, as to why, the same was not filed earlier. The appeal was pending for last two years. The appellate court has further observed that the application appears to have been moved only to further delay the disposal of the appeal.
In the above circumstances, this Court does not find any error committed by the appellate court, in rejecting the application- of the petitioner/appellant for adducing the evidence at the appellate state. Therefore, without expressing any opinion, as to the final merits of the appeal, the petition u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed summarily.