Supreme Court: Whether the court can permit Accused to Exhibit Documents as per S.294 CrPC, Already Part Of Chargesheet Without Formal Proof Of Signature?

 In order to duly appreciate the provisions of

Section 294 Cr.P.C., it is necessary to refer to the

provision which is reproduced as under:

“294. No formal proof of certain

documents.—(1) Where any document is

filed before any Court by the

prosecution or the accused, the

particulars of every such document

shall be included in a list and the

prosecution or the accused, as the case

may be, or the pleader for the

prosecution or the accused, if any,

shall be called upon to admit or deny

the genuineness of each such document.

(2) The list of documents shall be in

such form as be prescribed by the State

Government.

(3) Where the genuineness of any

document is not disputed, such document

may be read in evidence in inquiry,

trial or other proceeding under this

Code without proof of the signature of

the person to whom it purports to be

signed:

Provided that the Court may, in its

discretion, require such signature to

be proved.”{Para 4}

5) After perusal thereof, it cannot be doubted

that in case any document has been filed by the

prosecution or the accused in any Court, such

document is required to be included in a list. The

genuineness of the documents included in the list

can be ascertained by the Court by calling upon the

prosecution or the accused, as the case may be. If

such document is not disputed, it can be read in

inquiry, trial or other proceedings under Cr.P.C.

without proving the signature of the person to whom

it purports to be. As per proviso thereto, if

necessary, it is on the discretion of the Court to

require such signature to be proved, while applying

the provision of Section 294 (3) Cr.P.C.

6) In the facts of the present case, it is clear

that the documents as sought to be marked as

exhibits by the appellant are part of the

chargesheet and of documents produced by the

prosecution. The appellant, through averments made

in the application, contends that these documents

were included in the list of documents of

prosecution. Learned Additional Solicitor General,

appearing for the CBI, disputes this fact, but on

prima facie examination of the record, it suggests

that the documents sought by accused formed part of

the list of documents produced by CBI. Nevertheless,

we reserve the CBI’s liberty to raise this objection

at the appropriate stage before court.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026

(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 1383 of 2026)

R. GANESH Vs THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU 

Dated: April 27, 2026.

Print Page

Bombay HC: Prosecution under SC & ST (Atrocities) Act is liable to be quashed if caste of the complainant or the accused is not mentioned in the complaint

The learned Counsel for the applicant had relied on a decision of this Court reported in MANU/MH/0877/2005 : 2005(4)MhLj588 , Manohar Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra. This Court has made the following observations.

It is a precondition that person committing the alleged offence must not be belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. In the report filed in the Police Station, there ought to have been some averment indicating that the offender does not belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. In the absence of such averment or any other material before the Police Station Officer for coming to the conclusion that the accused named in the said report does not belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, the offence under Section 3 of the Atrocities Act cannot be registered.

It is apparent from this observations of this Court that the F.I.R. should not only disclose the caste of the complainant but it must also disclose the caste of the accused. If we go through the F.I.R., copy of which has been filed on record of this case, it would be clear that the report does disclose the caste of the complainant but it does not disclose the caste of the offender at all. The learned Counsel for the complainant/respondent No. 2 submitted that when the caste of the complainant itself is disclosed and it is alleged that he was abused on the basis of the caste, he is the person who does not belong to scheduled caste. Such an inference cannot be drawn. He also submitted that even if name of the complainant is seen, he does not belong to scheduled caste. Even such an inference cannot be drawn. The surnames in the State of Maharashtra is very deceptive. For instance, surnames Athawale, Abhyankar are to be found amongst Brahmins and such surnames are also to be found amongst scheduled castes. It cannot, therefore, be said that the surname can be a guide to find a caste of any particular person. It is particularly for this reason that it becomes necessary that the caste of the offender must also be disclosed in the complaint. In this particular case, the caste of the complainant is not disclosed in the complaint and yet the offence has been registered by the police. This Court in Manohar Kulkarni's case has specifically held that in no case the Police Officer can register an offence if caste of the complainant or the accused is not mentioned in the complaint. {Para 4}

8. Since I am bound by the decision in Manohar Kulkarni's case, I must hold that the F.I.R. under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act needs to be quashed. Hence, the following order. The petition is allowed to the extent that the F.I.R. registered under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act stands quashed.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

Cri. Appln. No. 1877 of 2007

Decided On: 04.10.2007

Prakash Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

C.L. Pangarkar, J.

Citation:  MANU/MH/1127/2007,2008(1) MHLJ 139,2008(2) Crimes 168.

Print Page

Andhra Pradesh HC: Whether the court can summon discharged or acquitted accused as witness U/S 311 of CRPC in the same case?

A plain reading of Sec. 311 does not place any restrictions on the power of the Court to issue summons to a witness if the Magistrate is of the opinion that the evidence of those witnesses is essential to the just decision of the case. After the complainant compounded the offences with Subbarayan and Kannan the latter two persons were acquitted as a result of the compounding and no longer figure as co-accused in the case to be tried along with the revision petitioner. It can no doubt be said that having figured as co-accused at an earlier point of time, the evidence which those witnesses are likely to give is in the nature of an accomplice evidence but then the court will naturally be on its guard in not acting on such evidence unless their evidence is corroborated in material particulars. The absence of evidence corroborating the evidence of these two persons in material particulars cannot impinge in any manner on the power of the court to summon them as witnesses. Sec. 311, therefore, gives ample power to the court to summon witnesses who are no longer accused before him if the Magistrate felt that their evidence is essential to the just decision of the case. {Para 2}

3. A few cases which have been relied upon can now be noticed. In Banu Singh v. Emperor I.L.R. 33 Cal. 1353 a Division Bench expressed itself:

"The law, however, is well settled, and there can be no controversy on the point that an accomplice, if he is not an accused under trial in the same case is a competent witness and may, as any other witness, be examined on oath.........On such a discharge or acquittal he becomes a competent witness against other persons accused of the same offence. The disability to be examined as a witness on oath against the persons who are brought before the court on the same indictment, may thus cease on the withdrawal of the indictment, against him".

The Supreme Court in Jamatraj v. State of Maharashtra MANU/SC/0063/1967 : A.I.R. 1968 S.C. 178, while considering the sweep of Sec. 540. Cr.P.C. (Repealed Code) expressed itself:

"Statutory law confers a power in absolute terms to be exercised at any stage of the trial to summon a witness provided the just decision of the case demands it............If the Court has acted without the requirements of a just decision, the action is open to criticism but if the Court's action is supportable as being in aid of a just decision, the action cannot be regarded as exceeding the jurisdiction."

The Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision referred to Dora Harrig's case 1927-2KB 587. In that case five persons were tried, two for stealing and they pleaded guilty and three others for receiving who pleaded not guilty. The first two remained in the dock and the trial proceeded against the other three. They gave evidence on their own behalf and the prosecution case was not quite strong. The Recorder then asked one of the other two accused to give evidence and allowed the prisoner Dora, against whom the evidence went, to cross-examine him but Dora was not asked to enter the Box again to contradict the new evidence. This was held by the Court of Criminal Appeal to be a wrong exercise of the power of the Court. It was an extreme example of the exercise of the power.

4. The observations made in the aforesaid decisions go to indicate that once the court's action is supportable as being in aid of a just decision, no exception can be taken if the Magistrate ordered issue of summons to persons who were no longer before him as accused to be tried in the case against the revision petitioner alone. The learned Magistrate has expressed himself that the witnesses appear to be just witnesses and the petition is worth allowing to meet the ends of justice. These expressions can, in the context, be only construed to mean that the Magistrate felt that the examination of these witnesses is essential to the just decision of the case. This objection raised by the revision petitioner is accordingly rejected.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

Crl. R.C. No. 803/82

Decided On: 17.12.1983

N. Chennimaliay Vs. The Andhra Pradesh Marketing Corporation

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

P. Ramachandra Raju, J.

 Citations

1984 MLJ CRI 1 4651984 ALT 1 3151984 APLJ HC 1 2371983 SCC ONLINE AP 1971984 AP LJ 1 2371984 CRI LJ NOC 139 531984 MLJ CRL 1 4651984 APLJ 1 237, MANU/AP/0245/1983

Print Page

Narco-Analysis Tests in Indian Criminal Law: Constitutional Safeguards and Evidentiary Value

 Constitutional Framework and Legal Provisions

Narco-analysis tests in India are governed primarily by constitutional protections under Article 20(3) (right against self-incrimination) and Article 21 (right to personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution. These rights are considered "non-derogable and sacrosanct rights to which the judiciary cannot carve out exceptions".

The Supreme Court has established that involuntary administration of narco-analysis violates the protection given by Article 20(3), and such tests cannot be conducted without the accused's free and informed consent. The Court emphasized that "under no circumstances is an involuntary or forced narco-analysis test permissible under law".

Print Page

Supreme Court: What is evidentiary value of voluntary Narco- analysis test of accused?

 264. In light of these conclusions, we hold that no individual should be forcibly subjected to any of the techniques in question, whether in the context of investigation in criminal cases or otherwise. Doing so would amount to an unwarranted intrusion into personal liberty. However, we do leave room for the voluntary administration of the impugned techniques in the context of criminal justice, provided that certain safeguards are in place. Even when the subject has given consent to undergo any of these tests, the test results by themselves cannot be admitted as evidence because the subject does not exercise conscious control over the responses during the administration of the test. However, any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntary administered test results can be admitted in accordance with Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.”

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAN

(Before Sanjay Karol and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.)

Amlesh Kumar  Vs  State of Bihar 

Criminal Appeal No.____ of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5392 of 2024)

Decided on June 9, 2025

Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1326,2025 INSC 810.

Read full judgment here: Click here

Print Page

Supreme Court: Whether an accused can voluntarily seek a narco-analysis test, as a matter of an indefeasible right?

 On the other hand, there is Rajasthan High Court, which in Sunil Bhatt v. State14, held that the accused can seek a narco-analysis test at a relevant stage in view of the statutory right to lead evidence in defence under Section 233 of the Criminal Procedure Code. {Para 19}

20. In our view, as rightly submitted by the learned Amicus, the above view of the Rajasthan High Court cannot be sustained. It cannot be said that undergoing a narco-analysis test is part of the indefeasible right to lead evidence, given its suspect nature, and moreover, we find the same to be in the teeth of the judgment of this Court in Selvi (supra). 

264. In light of these conclusions, we hold that no individual should be forcibly subjected to any of the techniques in question, whether in the context of investigation in criminal cases or otherwise. Doing so would amount to an unwarranted intrusion into personal liberty. However, we do leave room for the voluntary administration of the impugned techniques in the context of criminal justice, provided that certain safeguards are in place. Even when the subject has given consent to undergo any of these tests, the test results by themselves cannot be admitted as evidence because the subject does not exercise conscious control over the responses during the administration of the test. However, any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntary administered test results can be admitted in accordance with Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.”

(Emphasis supplied)

21. In view of the above exposition in Selvi (Supra), the third question is answered in the following terms:

The accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test at an appropriate stage. We deem it appropriate to add, that the appropriate stage for such a test to be conducted is when the accused is exercising his right to lead evidence in a trial. However, there is no indefeasible right with the accused to undergo a narco-analysis test, for upon receipt of such an application the concerned Court, must consider the totality of circumstances surrounding the matter, such as free consent, appropriate safeguards etc., authorizing a person to undergo a voluntary narco-analysis test. 

 In the Supreme Court of India

(Before Sanjay Karol and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.)

Amlesh Kumar  Vs  State of Bihar 

Criminal Appeal No.____ of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5392 of 2024)

Decided on June 9, 2025

Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1326,2025 INSC 810.

Print Page

Can prosecution or accused apply for alteration of charge in criminal appeal?

 Power to Alter Charges: Exclusive Judicial Prerogative

The power to alter charges under Section 216 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) lies exclusively with the court and cannot be invoked through an application by either the prosecution or the accused. This principle applies equally to both trial courts and appellate courts.

No Right to Apply for Charge Alteration

Neither party can seek alteration as a matter of right. The Supreme Court has clearly established that there is no right in any party to seek addition or alteration of charges by filing any application as a matter of right. The Kerala High Court reinforced this principle, noting that while a prosecution's application for charge alteration could not be entertained, the trial court retained discretion to independently alter or add charges if deemed necessary based on evidence presented.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Basic concept of last seen theory in criminal case

 It is not necessary to multiply with authorities. The principle is well settled. The provisions of Section 106 of the Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and categoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within the knowledge of a person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him. Thus, if a person is last seen with the deceased, he must offer an explanation as to how and when he parted company. He must furnish an explanation which appears to the Court to be probable and satisfactory. If he does so he must be held to have discharged his burden. If he fails to offer an explanation on the basis of facts within his special knowledge, he fails to discharge the burden cast upon him by Section 106 of the Evidence Act. In a case resting on circumstantial evidence if the accused fails to offer a reasonable explanation in discharge of the burden placed on him, that itself provides an additional link in the chain of circumstances proved against him. Section 106 does not shift the burden of proof in a criminal trial, which is always upon the prosecution. It lays down the rule that when the accused does not throw any light upon facts which are specially within his knowledge and which could not support any theory or hypothesis compatiable with his innocence, the Court can consider his failure to adduce any explanation, as an additional link which completes the chain. The principle has been succinctly stated in Re. Naina Mohd. AIR 1960 Madras, 218.

There is considerable force in the argument of counsel for the State that in the facts of this case as well it should be held that the respondent having been seen last with the deceased, the burden was upon him to prove what happened thereafter, since those facts were within his special knowledge. Since, the respondent failed to do so, it must be held that he failed to discharge the burden cast upon him by Section 106 of the Evidence Act. This circumstance, therefore, provides the missing link in the chain of circumstances which prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Supreme Court of India

State Of Rajasthan vs Kashi Ram on 7 November, 2006

Bench: B.P. Singh, Tarun Chatterjee

Citation;(2006)12 SCC 254 : AIR 2007 SC 144.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Under which circumstances burden of proof would be on investigating officer that he has supplied grounds of arrest to accused?

 The learned Single Judge, unfortunately, has equated information given regarding the Appellant's arrest with the grounds of arrest. The observation that the allegation of non- supply of the grounds of arrest made by the Appellant is a bald allegation is completely uncalled for. All courts, including the High Court, have a duty to uphold fundamental rights. Once a violation of a fundamental right Under Article 22(1) was alleged, it was the duty of the High Court to go into the said contention and decide in one way or the other. When a violation of Article 22(1) is alleged with respect to grounds of arrest, there can be possible two contentions raised: (a) that the arrested person was not informed of the grounds of arrest, or (b) purported information of grounds of arrest does not contain any ground of arrest. As far as the first contention is concerned, the person who is arrested can discharge his burden by simply alleging that grounds of arrest were not informed to him. If such an allegation is made in the pleadings, the entire burden is on the arresting agency or the State to satisfy the court that effective compliance was made with the requirement of Article 22(1). Therefore, the view taken by the High Court is completely erroneous. {Para 31}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 621 of 2025.

Decided On: 07.02.2025

Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and N. Kotiswar Singh, JJ.

Authored By : Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, N. Kotiswar Singh

Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, J.

Citation: Citation: 2025 INSC 162, MANU/SC/0161/2025.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Magistrate Cannot Direct Police To Include Accused In Charge Sheet; Instead may Issue Summons To Person Proposed To Be Added

The Court has the power to differ from the Final Form submitted by the Police and take cognizance of a crime and also against persons who may not have been sent up for trial by the Police after investigation. In such circumstances,the Court is then required to issue summons instead of directing for inclusion of the name of the person in the charge-sheet. Thus, ultimately, the result is the same, that is, the person concerned is arrayed as an accused upon taking cognizance after application ofmind by the Court and accordingly, summons are issued. Thus, the order which in essence is of summons as an accused, cannot be faulted. (Para 3)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).3649/2025; 

GOPAL PRADHAN  Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH; J., PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA; J.

Dated: 17-03-2025.

Print Page

Bombay HC: Offence of outraging modesty of a lady depends on intention or knowledge of accused and feeling of woman

From bare reading of the Section, which is identically worded as Section 509 of IPC, the essential ingredients noted are as below :-

i. Intention to insult the modesty of a woman;

ii. The insult must be caused by :

a. uttering any words, or making any sound

b. or gesture.

c. or exhibiting any object

intending that such word or sound shall be heard or that the gesture or object shall be seen by such woman, or

iii. Intruding upon the privacy of such a woman.

The aforesaid provision comprise of three pivotal components for establishing an offence; firstly, the presence of an intention to insult the modesty of a woman; secondly, the manner in which this insult is perpetrated and thirdly, though independently, an intrusion on her privacy, where it is not restricted to utterance or gesture, as it is not qualified by any prescribed manner.

15. In Major Singh (supra), while answering the question whether the Respondent who caused injury to the private parts of a female child of seven and half months is guilty under Section 354 of the Penal Code, an offence of outraging the modesty of a woman, which involves assault or use of criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, Chief Justice A.K. Sarkar, opined that the offence does not depend on the reaction of the woman subjected to the assault or use of criminal force, as the Section contemplate that the act has to be done "intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty" and this intention or knowledge is the ingredient of the offence and not the woman's feeling.

In no uncertain terms, the necessary ingredients of the said offence were carved out in the following words :-

"It would follow that if the intention or knowledge was not proved, proof of the fact that the woman felt that her modesty had been outraged would not satisfy the necessary ingredient of the offence. Likewise, if the intention or knowledge was proved, the fact that the woman did not feel that her modesty had been outraged would be irrelevant, for the necessary ingredient would then have been proved. The sense of modesty in all women is of course not the same; it varies from woman to woman. In many cases, the woman's sense of modesty would not be known to others. If the test of the offence was the reaction of the woman, then it would have to be proved that the offender knew the standard of the modesty of the woman concerned, as otherwise, it could not be proved that he had intended to outrage "her" modesty...."

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Criminal Writ Petition No. 3858 of 2024

Decided On: 09.12.2024

Ratnadeep Ram Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Bharati H. Dangre and Manjusha Ajay Deshpande, JJ.

Author: Bharati H. Dangre, J.

 Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:48668-DB, MANU/MH/7471/2024.

Print Page

Bombay HC: What precautions Session Judge should take while putting question U/S 313 of CRPC to accused?

 I have perused the 313 Cr. P.C. statements of the appellants recorded by the learned Judge. While recording the 313 Cr. P.C. statements of the appellants, the learned Judge did not frame proper questions. The material part of the incriminating evidence adduced by the prosecution was not put to the appellants. In this context, it is necessary to see some of the questions framed by the learned Judge. As stated above, the proof of the identity of the appellants, being the perpetrators of the crime, was the fact in issue. The learned Judge was required to frame proper questions on the basis of the available evidence of the witnesses with regard to their identification. As stated above, the identification of the appellants was established by pointing out their photographs to the prosecutrix. It was not put to the appellants that they were identified by the victim before the Court in a particular manner. The incriminating part of her evidence with regard to the identification of the appellants in the Test Identification Parade was not specifically put to the appellants. It is further seen that the CA reports and the DNA report, being the important pieces of evidence, ought to have been put to them specifically in their 313 statements. Question No. 35 is common for both the appellants. It needs to be extracted. It is as follows:

“Q. No. 35. It has come in the evidence of PW-10 Satish K. Farkade (Ex.97) during investigation he prepared spot panchanama, seizure panchanama. He seized motor cycle, sickle, chapple, godahdi, clothes on the person of victim and muddemal sent for C.A. and obtain C.A. report. What do you have to state about it ?”{Para 29}

30. Perusal of this question would show that the incriminating material in the form of CA reports was put to the appellants in this manner. Perusal of 313 Cr. P.C. statements of the appellants would show that the DNA report was not at all put to them. Even if the appellants had admitted the DNA report, the learned Judge was required to put the same to the appellants in their 313 Cr. P.C. statements. It needs to be stated that, in this case, the appellants have not admitted the DNA report. It is pertinent to mention that, time and again, it has been observed that proper care is not taken while framing the questions in the 313 Cr. P.C. statement of the accused on the basis of the incriminating material. Sometimes, the composite questions are framed. The answer to the part of the question may be in the affirmative and the answer to the part of the question may be in the negative. Such a composite question needs to be avoided. The appellants are the rustic villagers. Similarly, the victim is also a rustic villager. The incriminating circumstances related to the CA and DNA reports had not been put to them. Failure of the learned Judge to follow the provisions of law has caused miscarriage of justice. It has prejudiced not only the appellants but also the victim.

31. In this case, the DNA report has not been put to the appellants. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra [(1984) 4 SCC 116 : AIR 1984 SC 1622] has held that incriminating piece of evidence, if not put to the accused in his 313 Cr. P.C. statement, cannot be made the basis of the conviction of the accused. It has to be excluded from consideration. It is to be noted that, while recording the evidence, the learned Prosecutor and the learned Judge adopted a very casual and careless approach. The DNA Expert and the Chemical Analyzer have not been examined. The learned Judge, while examining the accused under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C., did not even care to frame a proper question and put the DNA report to the accused so as to enable them to explain it. This has caused prejudice to the appellants. Similarly, it has proved prejudicial to the prosecutrix, who had suffered the ordeal of a horrible incident. She was not at fault. This has resulted into miscarriage of justice.

In the High Court of Bombay

(Before G.A. Sanap, J.)

Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2022

Puranlal Sakaru Dhurve. Vs State of Maharashtra, 

Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2022 and Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2022

Decided on September 30, 2024

Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 3437.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Bombay HC: What precautions Session Judge should take while admitting the CA reports and the DNA report?

  The Prosecutor has not examined the carrier, who had deposited the samples with R.F.S.L., Amravati. The Investigating Officer did not produce on record the extract of the Malkhana register. Malkhana in-charge was not examined. It is to be noted that the samples had been collected on or before 6th April, 2016. The samples had been forwarded to the R.F.S.L., Amravati, vide Exh.106 on 11th April, 2016. The prosecution has failed to place on record the evidence with regard to the custody of the samples and the care taken to preserve the samples during this period. If the carrier had been examined, then he would have highlighted the relevant aspects. The CA reports, in this case, are very important. The CA reports had been tendered in the evidence at the time of the examination of the Investigating Officer (PW-10). The learned Judge did not pass a specific order under Section 293 of the Cr. P.C. and admitted these reports in evidence. The CA reports are very important. On the basis of the CA reports, a case is sought to be made out that the blood sample and the semen samples matched with the blood samples of the appellants. {Para 24}

26. The Prosecutor failed to examine the Chemical Analyzer, Amravati, to prove the contents of the CA reports. Similarly, he has failed to examine the DNA Expert from R.F.S.L., Nagpur. It is to be noted that DNA evidence is a scientific opinion. It has to be proved like any other document. The prosecution has to establish the link by adducing cogent and concrete evidence from the time of the collection of the samples till the samples are finally analysed by the F.S.L. In this case, the carrier has not been examined. The Chemical Analyzer has not been examined. Similarly, the DNA Expert has not been examined. 

27. In this case, the important witnesses have not been examined. There is no evidence with regard to the packaging, storage, handling, and preservation of the samples to rule out possibility of tampering or contamination. Perusal of the record would show that there is no reason for non-examination of these witnesses. The learned Judge has placed implicit reliance on the CA reports and the DNA report. The complete DNA report is not part of the record. Therefore, the finding recorded by the learned Judge that the DNA report fully corroborates the testimony of the prosecutrix is without application of mind. It is to be noted that it was the duty of the learned Judge at least to question the Prosecutor with regard to the evidence to prove the contents of these reports. The record shows that the learned Judge, while recording the examination-in-chief of the Investigating Officer, exhibited the CA reports and the DNA report. I fail to understand as to how the Investigating Officer could be the author of the CA reports and the DNA report. The evidence of the Investigating Officer could not be said to be legally admissible evidence to prove the contents of the CA reports and the DNA report. The evidence of the Investigating Officer could be relevant to the extent of the procedural part with regard to forwarding of the samples, preservation of the samples, and the receipt of the DNA report. In such a case, the learned Judge was required to pass a separate order under Section 293 of the Cr. P.C. and admit such scientific evidence in the case. It is to be noted that the helpless prosecutrix had no control over this. The acceptance of the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the appellants, highlighting the drawbacks and lacunas, would cause miscarriage of justice. The helpless prosecutrix would be deprived of her right to get justice. In my view, this is a very serious matter.

28. Before parting with this subject, I must mention that while admitting the CA reports and the DNA report, without examining the Chemical Analyzer and the DNA Expert, the Court has to pass an appropriate order. First and foremost, the learned Presiding Officer shall insist for the examination of the Chemical Analyzer and the DNA Expert to prove the contents of the reports. The examination of the Chemical Analyzer and the DNA expert, in such a case, can take care of the custody, preservation, and handling of the samples from the time of the receipt till the final analysis of the samples. In my view, this is a very vital flaw in the case of the prosecution, which has been crept in on account of the casual and careless approach of the Prosecutor and the learned Presiding Officer.

In the High Court of Bombay

(Before G.A. Sanap, J.)

Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2022

Puranlal Sakaru Dhurve. Vs State of Maharashtra, 

Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2022 and Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2022

Decided on September 30, 2024

Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 3437.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Whether Session Judge can permit prosecution to show photo of accused to victim for his identification?

Learned advocate Mr. R.R. Vyas took me through the entire record and pointed out the material flaws in the case. Learned advocate submitted that, on the date of the evidence of the informant, the appellants were not produced before the Court. It is submitted that the evidence recorded in the absence of the accused was contrary to the mandate of Section 273 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, “Cr.PC”). Learned advocate submitted that the learned Judge, without insisting for the production of the appellants while recording the evidence of such a star witness, showed some photographs of the appellants from the record to the informant to establish their identification. Learned advocate further submitted that the trial conducted against the appellants was not a fair trial. {Para 8}

 The identification of the accused in the Court has to be strictly proved in such cases. The learned second Judge, who recorded the evidence of PW-4, did not even bother to secure the presence of the appellants. The learned Judge adopted a shortcut method. The learned Judge, instead of securing the presence of the appellants, showed some photographs from the record to the informant. On going through the record, I am shocked that the full-size photographs of the appellants are not on record. The learned Judge has not made a note as to which photographs had been shown to the appellants. It is further seen that those photographs have not even been marked as articles or exhibits.

In the High Court of Bombay

(Before G.A. Sanap, J.)

Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2022

Puranlal Sakaru Dhurve. Vs State of Maharashtra, 

Criminal Appeal No. 155 of 2022 and Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2022

Decided on September 30, 2024

Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 3437.

Print Page

Under Which circumstances, the Session Judge should reject the Anticipatory bail application of accused?

The applicant was inebriated at the time of

incident. It was a dash by his vehicle to the scooty of

the deceased resulted into the death of two persons and

severely injured one child. Thus the offence ought to

have been hit and run by a drunk person within ambit

of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. The

investigating officers have not chosen to add this

offence and added Section 304A and 279 of Indian

Penal Code in order to extend helping hand to accused

to release him on bail. {Para 17}

18. However learned D.G.P. as well as informant have

brought to the notice of this Court all these intentional

lapses by the investigating agency as such, this Court

cannot be act as a mute spectator to see the foul play by

the investigating agency. Thus the judicial activism

comes into play and the intervention by the court is the

ultimate requirement of it. On face of record in the

light of submission, the prima facie case is within ambit

of Section 304 of Indian Penal Code.

19. In addition after the incident, the informant has

chosen to take the photographs as well as videos of the

incident. The applicant got annoyed and slapped to the

informant on his check and caught hold his collar. Thus

the subsequent conduct of this applicant speaks of his

arrogance toward the police officer on duty.”

8. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Ponda appearing for Applicant,

however, tried to explain the behaviour of the Applicant on the

ground that he is under medication on the ground of anxiety since

the year 2010 when his elder brother met with an accident in the

year 2010. It is tried to impress upon the Court that he was not intoxicated but due to anxiety he behaved in different manner. It is further argued that there is no evidence available on record to show that he was inebriated as no blood sample was taken.

9. The said contentions cannot be considered considering the seriousness of the offence and overall conduct and behavior of the Applicant. Moreover, it can be seen that how the Applicant is influential which he appeared to have used after the incidence and because of which in presence of police he could flee away and which is the reason for not having blood sample of the Applicant. Thus, in this matter, benefit of the fact that blood sample was not taken, cannot be given to such person.

11. In view of the above referred observations, there is every

likelihood that if the Applicant is released on bail, he may tamper

with the prosecution evidence and pressurize the witnesses. Thus, I

am not inclined to grant bail. Accordingly the application is rejected.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3412 OF 2024

Jay Chandrahas Gharat Vs  The State of Maharashtra

CORAM : ANIL S.KILOR, J.

DATE : 25th October 2024

Print Page

Madras High court guidelines for trial of person of unsound mind in criminal case

54. In fine, this Court issues the following directions:

i. the trial Court shall conduct enquiry under the first part of

Section 329(2) Cr.P.C., to find out if the accused in this case is

capable of entering into his defence in praesenti;

ii. if the trial Court finds that the accused in this case is mentally

fit to face the trial, the trial shall be commenced and completed

within 3 months from the date of such determination;

iii. in the event of the trial Court holding that the accused is not

mentally fit to face the trial, the trial Court shall conduct an

enquiry under the second part of Section 329(2) Cr.P.C. and

afford an opportunity to the family of the accused to engage a

lawyer and if the family is not in a position to engage a lawyer,

the trial Court shall appoint a senior lawyer of the local bar

with not less than 20 years of standing and with rich experience

in criminal law, to take up the case of the accused in the

enquiry, for whom, remuneration shall be paid by the local

Legal Services Authority;

iv. in the enquiry, it is open to the trial Court to examine any

witness, including the doctors who had treated the accused

prior to the incident; the native doctor to whom the accused

was taken on the fateful day, can also be examined;

v. the trial Court may also enquire the doctors who treated the

accused after his arrest while he was in judicial custody;

vi. the counsel for the accused may also be permitted to place

materials before the Court in support of the case of the accused;

vii. at the conclusion of the enquiry, if the trial Court is of the

opinion that the criminal act fell within the contours of Section

84 IPC, it will then be open to the trial Court to discharge the

accused and follow the procedure set out in the proviso (a) to

Section 330(3) Cr.P.C.;

viii. In the event of the trial Court not discharging the accused, it

shall proceed under the proviso (b) to Section 330(3) Cr.P.C. In

that case, the finding arrived at by the trial Court against the

accused shall, in no manner, be binding on the accused in the

trial against him after he is certified as mentally fit to face the

trial in the future. In other words, it will be open to the accused

to establish once again before the trial Court that his case

would fall within Section 84 IPC, because, what was done

when the accused was mentally absent in the Court, cannot be

put against him when he is mentally stable subsequently.

55. At this juncture, this Court is impelled to exhort the trial Judges to get themselves thoroughly acquainted with the provisions in Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, because, as per the W.H.O. predictions, there is going to be a huge spike in our country in the number of people with

mental illness, as a sequel to which, there is bound to be a paradigm shift in the nature of crimes in the near future, to tackle which, our legal system should gear up. In this context, it may be worthwhile to quote Mr.G.P.Pilania, M.P., from his speech in the Parliament on 18.12.2008 when the 2009 amendments were introduced:

“The sixth point pertains to inquiry and trial of persons of

unsound mind, who cannot look after themselves, and who are

persons who have been betrayed by God and society. A special

provision to take care of those who are of unsound mind has been made, which is laudable.” (emphasis supplied)

The Courts must, therefore, act and discharge their constitutional obligations as ever-vigilant sentinels of the rights of these persons.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Crl.O.P.No.4993 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.Nos.2485 & 2486 of 2018

Kaliyappan S/o.Muniyappan Aanurpatty Vs State.

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

PRONOUNCED ON: 04.09.2020.

Print Page

Under which circumstances, names of accused should not be mentioned in court filings?

 34.2.3. The name, parentage and address of family members of the prosecutrix/victim/survivor - through whom the prosecutrix/victim/survivor could be identified - must not be disclosed in the filings, including in the memo of parties, even if they are accused in the case, since this may indirectly lead to the identification of the prosecutrix/victim/survivor;

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Bail Appln. 3635/2022

Decided On: 19.04.2023

Saleem Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J.

Citation: 2023:DHC:2622,MANU/DE/2515/2023.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme court: Statement Of Accused is Inadmissible U/S 27 of Evidence Act If No New Fact Is Discovered Pursuant To Disclosure

 On a threadbare analysis of the entire record, we do not find that the prosecution examined any witness who had deposed about the link evidence/safe custody of the mudammal articles right from the time they were received at the police station and seized till the time the same reached the FSL. Hence, otherwise also, the FSL report(Exhibits 111-115) pales into insignificance. Investigating Officer(PW-18) deposed that he arrested the Accused persons. A detailed enquiry was made from all three Accused-Appellants, and they were examined for the injuries found on their bodies. Thereafter, all the Accused-Appellants conveyed their willingness to show the place of the offence and thereafter, panchnama as per Section 27 of the Evidence Act was prepared. Since the place of incident was also known to police, this disclosure is irrelevant. {Para 45}

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 2828-2829 of 2023 and 112 of 2024

Decided On: 08.08.2024

Allarakha Habib Memon and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Author: Sandeep Mehta, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0856/2024.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: The court should not rely on FSL report if prosecution has failed to prove chain of custody

 The trial Court as well as the High Court heavily relied upon the FSL reports(Exhibits 111-115) to hold that blood group found on the weapons of offence incriminated the Accused for the crime as the same matched with the blood group of the deceased. In this regard, it is suffice to say that the two weapons which were picked up by Demistalkumar(PW-12) from the place of occurrence were formally seized at the Anand Town Police Station around 2:30 am on 5th May, 2011. Only one of the panchas Mohammad Hussain(PW-5) was examined at the trial. The seizure panchnama(Exhibit -38) records that the three Accused who had inflicted deadly blows to the deceased with dagger, gupti and knife, threw away their weapons near the garden and fled away from the crime scene and that police personnel brought all the weapons to the police station. However, the panchnama(Exhibit P-38) does not bear the signatures of the police constable, Demistalkumar(PW-12) who admittedly collected the weapons from the crime scene and presented them to the police station. Thus, no credence can be given to seizure panchnama(Exhibit P-38) because it suffers from the lacuna of not being attested by the witness who had actually presented the weapons at the police station. In addition, thereto, we may further note that Demistalkumar(PW-12), the police constable who deposited the weapons at the police station, did not state in his evidence as to whom he had given the knife and the gupti which he picked up from the crime scene. These weapons were seized vide seizure panchnama(Exhibit-38) which was admittedly prepared at 2:30 am. However, the Police Constable, Demistalkumar(PW-12) stated that he reached the police station at about 9:15 pm and stayed there for only 20 minutes. These infirmities create a doubt on the very process of seizure of the weapons. {Para 42}

43. The trial Court as well as the High Court heavily relied upon the FSL reports(Exhibits 111-115) for finding corroboration to the evidence of the eyewitnesses and in drawing a conclusion regarding culpability of the Appellants for the crime. We may reiterate that the testimony of the so-called eyewitnesses has already been discarded above by holding the same to be doubtful. Thus, even presuming that the FSL reports(Exhibits 111-115) conclude that the blood group found on the weapons recovered at the instance of the Accused matched with the blood group of the deceased, this circumstance in isolation, cannot be considered sufficient so as to link the Accused with the crime. In this regard, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Mustkeem alias Sirajudeen v. State of Rajasthan   MANU/SC/0795/2011 : 2011:INSC:487 : (2011) 11 SCC 724, wherein this Court held that sole circumstance of recovery of bloodstained weapon cannot form the basis of conviction unless the same was connected with the murder of the deceased by the Accused. The relevant portion is extracted hereinbelow:

19. The AB blood group which was found on the clothes of the deceased does not by itself establish the guilt of the Appellant unless the same was connected with the murder of the deceased by the Appellants. None of the witnesses examined by the prosecution could establish that fact. The blood found on the sword recovered at the instance of Mustkeem was not sufficient for test as the same had already disintegrated. At any rate, due to the reasons elaborated in the following paragraphs, the fact that the traces of blood found on the deceased matched those found on the recovered weapons cannot ipso facto enable us to arrive at the conclusion that the latter were used for the murder.

(emphasis supplied)

44. On a perusal of the deposition of the Investigating Officer(PW- 18), we find his evidence on the aspect of disclosure statements made by the Accused-Appellant leading to the recoveries to be totally perfunctory and unacceptable. The witness did not elaborate upon the words spoken by the Accused-Appellant at the time of making the disclosure statements.

45. On a threadbare analysis of the entire record, we do not find that the prosecution examined any witness who had deposed about the link evidence/safe custody of the mudammal articles right from the time they were received at the police station and seized till the time the same reached the FSL. Hence, otherwise also, the FSL report(Exhibits 111-115) pales into insignificance. Investigating Officer(PW-18) deposed that he arrested the Accused persons. A detailed enquiry was made from all three Accused-Appellants, and they were examined for the injuries found on their bodies. Thereafter, all the Accused-Appellants conveyed their willingness to show the place of the offence and thereafter, panchnama as per Section 27 of the Evidence Act was prepared. Since the place of incident was also known to police, this disclosure is irrelevant. Search of the houses of the Accused-Appellant was undertaken in presence of the panch witnesses and a big knife was seized from the house of the Accused Mohmedfaruk @ Palak, vide panchnama(Exhibit-52).

46. Hence, we are of the firm view that neither the disclosure statements made by the Accused were proved as per law nor the same resulted into any discovery which could be accepted as incriminating inasmuch as the requisite link evidence was never presented by the prosecution so as to establish that the recovered articles remained in the self-safe condition from the date of the seizure till the same reached the FSL.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 2828-2829 of 2023 and 112 of 2024

Decided On: 08.08.2024

Allarakha Habib Memon and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Author: Sandeep Mehta, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0856/2024.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page