Relevance of documents in criminal trial: court permits production despite objections on delay, surprise, and later evidentiary proof.

Documents sought to be introduced under Section 311 CrPC were found relevant to allegations of suppression of the true thickness of imported goods and consequent duty evasion, so their production was permitted. The stage of trial did not bar consideration of the material, and the accused's right of cross-examination remained available. Objections based on delay, alleged surprise to the defence, and admissibility were treated as separate from the threshold issue of relevance at that stage. Questions whether the documents would ultimately be proved as primary or secondary evidence, and whether they would satisfy evidentiary requirements, were left for later determination. The application was allowed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to bring on record the bill of entries and related documents should be allowed.

Analysis: The documents sought to be produced were stated to be relevant to the allegation regarding suppression of the true thickness of imported goods and consequent evasion of duty. The Court held that the stage of trial did not preclude consideration of such material, and that the accused would retain the right of cross-examination. The objections relating to delay, alleged surprise to the defence, and admissibility were treated as distinct from the question of relevance at this stage. The Court further held that whether the documents would ultimately be proved as primary or secondary evidence, and whether they would satisfy the requirements of the evidence law, were matters to be determined later.

Conclusion: The application was allowed, with costs, because the documents were found relevant for adjudication of the case.

---