TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petition dismissed for seeking documents under Section 91 Cr.P.C. without establishing necessity during prosecution evidence stage</h1> <h3>B. Sambi Reddy Versus CBI</h3> B. Sambi Reddy Versus CBI - TMI Issues Involved:1. Application u/s 91 Cr.P.C for summoning documents.2. Relevance and necessity of documents for cross-examination.3. Stage of trial for invoking Section 91 Cr.P.C.Summary:1. Application u/s 91 Cr.P.C for summoning documents:The petitioner filed an application u/s 91 Cr.P.C seeking to summon relevant documents for cross-examination of the complainant. The learned Trial Court dismissed this application on 16.11.2019, leading to the present petition.2. Relevance and necessity of documents for cross-examination:The petitioner argued that the documents were necessary for cross-examination as they pertained to irregularities committed by the complainant during his tenure as Zonal Manager, Dena Bank. The petitioner had previously filed an application u/s 91 Cr.P.C, which was allowed by the learned Special Judge, Karkardooma Court on 17.12.2018. However, the petitioner claimed that certain relevant documents were not provided by the IO, necessitating a second application u/s 91 Cr.P.C.3. Stage of trial for invoking Section 91 Cr.P.C:The Court noted that Section 91 Cr.P.C can be invoked at any stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, or other proceedings when the production of documents is deemed necessary or desirable. However, the necessity and desirability must be examined considering the stage of the trial. The Court observed that the documents requested by the petitioner did not pertain to the case file but were part of another case. The Court emphasized that the right to seek documents is not absolute and is typically exercised during the defence evidence stage.Conclusion:The Court found no ground to interfere with the impugned order dated 16.11.2019, dismissing the petition. The petitioner was advised to move an appropriate application before the competent court to summon documents at the stage of defence evidence. The petition along with pending applications was dismissed, reserving the petitioner's right to avail appropriate remedies at the relevant stage of the trial.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
