Section 91 CrPC limits document summons at prosecution evidence stage unless necessity is shown; defence stage remains the usual course.

Section 91 CrPC does not ordinarily support an accused's request to summon additional documents at the prosecution evidence stage unless necessity or desirability for that stage is shown. The court noted that such requests are usually more appropriate at the defence stage, and that the petitioner had already been given access to earlier identified documents. Because the further material sought related to another case concerning the complainant, not the prosecution case against the petitioner, no basis was shown to interfere with the trial court's refusal. The petition failed, while liberty was left open to seek appropriate relief at the defence stage in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to summon additional documents under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 at the stage of prosecution evidence for the purpose of cross-examining the complainant, and whether the impugned order declining such relief called for interference.

Analysis: The power under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 depends on the court being satisfied that production of the document is necessary or desirable for the proceeding at the relevant stage. The cited precedents make it clear that, for an accused, such a request ordinarily becomes relevant at the stage of defence and not at the stage of framing of charge or prosecution evidence unless a clear necessity is shown. The petitioner had already been granted access to the documents earlier identified, and the further material sought related to another case concerning the complainant, not to the prosecution case against the petitioner. The petitioner did not demonstrate that the requested documents were essential for the prosecution evidence stage or that the trial court had wrongly refused to exercise discretion.

Conclusion: The request for summoning the additional documents was not maintainable at that stage, and the refusal to interfere with the impugned order was justified. The decision is against the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed, while leaving open the petitioner's liberty to seek appropriate relief at the defence stage in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A court will not ordinarily compel production of documents under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 at the prosecution evidence stage for an accused unless necessity or desirability is shown for that stage; such requests are ordinarily reserved for defence evidence.

---