Appellate additional evidence under CrPC is exceptional and cannot be used to fill defence gaps or reopen settled issues.

Section 391 CrPC permits additional evidence on appeal only in exceptional cases where the court finds it necessary for a just decision. The power is controlled and cannot be used to fill gaps in the defence or reopen issues already decided at trial. A photostat copy of a cheque was sought as secondary evidence after claimed late discovery nearly nine years later, but the explanation was found unconvincing and the copy was considered vulnerable to manipulation. As the proposed evidence would revive the disputed cheque date, already examined through expert evidence, the request for additional evidence was rejected and the appellate court's discretion was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to lead additional evidence in appeal under section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by tendering a photostat copy of the cheque as secondary evidence.

Analysis: Section 391 confers a wide but controlled appellate discretion to take additional evidence only where the court finds it necessary for a just decision. The power is exceptional and must be exercised sparingly, not to fill up lacunae or permit a disguised retrial. The additional material sought here was a photostat copy of the cheque said to have been discovered nearly nine years later during perusal of case documents. The explanation for late discovery was found unconvincing, and a photocopy of a negotiable instrument was regarded as inherently vulnerable to manipulation. The proposed evidence would also reopen the disputed issue of the cheque date, which had already been examined at trial through expert evidence.

Conclusion: The request for additional evidence was rightly rejected; no case was made out for interference with the appellate court's exercise of discretion.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed, and the refusal to permit additional evidence was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Additional evidence at the appellate stage may be allowed only in exceptional cases where necessity for a just decision is shown, and not to fill gaps in the defence or reopen matters already adjudicated.

---