Additional evidence in appeal may be admitted when necessary for justice and not merely to fill trial gaps.

Additional evidence at the appellate stage may be received where it is relevant, necessary for a just decision, and not sought merely to fill gaps in the trial case. The appellate court should treat appeal as a continuation of the proceedings and may admit material bearing on the correctness of the conviction if its reception advances the ends of justice and causes no prejudice. On that basis, evidence concerning the sampling and sealing process, and research material said to inform the effect of formalin on milk test results, was treated as admissible, and the refusal order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether additional evidence could be permitted at the appellate stage under the applicable criminal procedure provision, and whether the proposed evidence was relevant, necessary, and not merely an attempt to fill lacunae.

Analysis: The discretion to take additional evidence at the appellate stage is to be exercised to secure the ends of justice, but only when the evidence is necessary for a just decision and its reception does not prejudice the parties. The proposed witness was said to have knowledge of the sampling and sealing process and had been examined only in a later departmental enquiry, making the evidence unavailable during trial. The proposed research material was treated as expert opinion relevant to the effect of formalin on milk test results. The Court found the appellate court's view erroneous in treating the evidence as irrelevant or inadmissible merely because it arose after trial, since an appeal is a continuation of the proceedings and relevant material bearing on the correctness of the conviction cannot be excluded if it is necessary for just adjudication.

Conclusion: Additional evidence was rightly allowed to be produced at the appellate stage, and the refusal order was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Additional evidence may be admitted in appeal when it is relevant and necessary for a just decision, provided it is not sought merely to fill gaps in the trial case and its admission serves the ends of justice.

---