TMI Blog1977 (3) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Criminal Procedure 1973).? 2. Whether, if it is not obligatory upon the prosecution to supply the copies, an accused in order to show the contradiction or inconsistency between the statement of the witness at the trial and what he had stated before the inquiry officer, can call in evidence for the copy for the purposes of Section 145 Indian Evidence Act? 3. If the answer to the above is in the negative, in what manner the trial court should act to ensure a fair trial of the accused? 4. Whether an accused not making a request for copies at the trial can complain of material prejudice being caused to him by the non-supply of such copies at the hearing of the appeal? 2. So far as the first question is concerned, the matter is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cial stands in sharp contrast with the duty cast by Section 173(1)(a) of the Code on the officer in charge of a police station to submit a report to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. On the conclusion of an inquiry Under Section 8(1), therefore, if the officer is of the opinion that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion against the accused, he must file a complaint Under Section 190(1)(a) of the Code in order that the Magistrate concerned may take cognizance of the offence. Further in para 23 it was said : The High Court was therefore in error in holding that statements made during the inquiry Under Section 8(1) of the Act are on a par with statements made during the course of an inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 403 and record our respectful dissent from the view taken by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Indal Singh v. State 1972 Cri LJ. 188. 4. Before we turn to the second question, it would be relevant to consider what use the prosecution or the accused can make of such statements at the trial for an offence under the Act. 5. Section 9 of the Act empowers the officer of the Force to summon any person to give evidence or to produce a document or any other thing in any inquiry which he may be making for any of the purposes of the Act. Sub-section (4) provides that every such inquiry shall be deemed to be a Judicial proceedings. within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code. It is under the authority given by Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the course of inquiry is the question that next falls for our consideration. learned Counsel for the revisionist has urged that unless the accused can get the copies of the statement, they will not be in a position to exercise the right Under Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act. We agree with the learned Counsel that the inconsistency or contradiction shown to exist between the statement made in the course of inquiry and what the witness has said in the examination-in-chief may affect his credit. But his previous statement cannot be used to get rid of the evidence which he is giving unless it is read to him or he is allowed to read it, the obvious reason being to give him an opportunity of explaining the apparent discrepancy. It is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t copies of the statements in advance. There is no rule which, in our opinion, touches such a case or which in any way recognises such a right. Accordingly we answer the second question in the negative. 7. Then arises the question in what manner the accused could exercise the right to contradict a witness with reference to his previous statement for the purpose of impeaching his credit and showing before the Court that the witness was not giving a truthful account of the material incident or fact. Our general approach should be such as it may not militate very greatly against the interest of justice. Every document, particularly in criminal trial, must be admitted in evidence to throw light on the obscure corners of the case. The light s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess to prevaricate. (See Pulukuri Kottaya v. Emperor AIR 1947 PC 67 : 48 Cri LJ 533). In our opinion the Judge at the trial before him whether a case for applying the rule of evidence has arisen and whether the account given by the witness in his testimony is inconsistent with the statement given by the witness during the course of the inquiry. Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 91 of the Code (Section 257 of Cr. P. C. 1898) enable the court to call for any particular document relevant for the purposes of the trial and if the trial Judge upon a perusal of the record is of the view that a foundation for an attack on the credit of the witness can be laid by the accused, the court would direct the prosecutor to give copies of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
