TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 1370
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s been found guilty of offences under Section 51, 52, and 59 the Act of 2006 and has been sentenced to a fine of Rs.5.00 lacs for offence under Section 51, Rs.3.00 lacs for offence under Section 52 and imprisonment of six months with a fine of Rs.1.00 lac for offence under Section 59. 4) The aforesaid judgment of the trial court came to be challenged by the petitioner by way of an appeal before the Principal Sessions Judge, Budgam (hereinafter referred to as the Appellate Court). During pendency of the appeal, petitioner filed an application under Section 428 of the J&K Cr. P. C (which corresponds to Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking permission to produce additional evidence. The said application came to be dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide the impugned order. While dismissing the application, the learned Appellate Court has observed that the documents which the petitioner seeks to place on record and the evidence which he seeks to produce is not relevant and admissible. It has been also observed that petitioner had all the available opportunity to produce this evidence before the trial court which he failed to do and now he cannot be permit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 391 of Central Cr. P. C), which reads as under: 428. Appellate Court may take further evidence or direct it to be taken. -- (1) In dealing with any appeal under this Chapter, the Appellate Court, if it thinks additional evidence to be necessary, shall record its reasons, and may either take such evidence itself, or direct it to be taken by a Judicial Magistrate or, when the Appellate Court is the High Court, by a Court of Session or a Judicial Magistrate. (2) When the additional evidence is taken by the Court of Session or the Magistrate, it or he shall certify such evidence to the Appellate Court, and such Court shall thereupon proceed to dispose of the appeal. (3) Unless the Appellate Court otherwise directs, the accused or his pleader shall be present when the additional evidence is taken; but such evidence shall not be taken in the presence of jurors. (4) The taking of evidence under this section shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter XXV, as if it were an inquiry. 9) From a perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is clear that it is the discretion of the Appellate Court to take additional evidence at appellate stage. The only requirement is that such additio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'s appeal is pending before the High Court, the `Approver' is found blabbering and boasting among his friends that he was able to take the Court for a ride and settled his personal score with the convict by sending him to jail to rot at least for 14 years. Such a statement would also be completely beyond the legal framework but can it be said that in light of such a development the convicted accused may not ask the High Court for recalling the Approver for further examination." 12) Again, in Sukhjeet Singh vs. The state of Uttar Pradesh and Ors., (2019) 16 SCC 712, the Supreme Court, after noticing its earlier decisions on the subject, held that there are no fetters on the power under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. of the Appellate Court. The Court went on to hold that all powers are conferred on the Court to secure ends of justice, the ultimate object of judicial administration is to secure ends of justice and Court exists for rendering justice to the people 13) From the foregoing enunciation of law on the subject, it is clear that it ultimately is the discretion of the Appellate Court as to whether additional evidence can be permitted to be adduced at the appellate stage but su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nviction of the petitioner and no direction with regard to holding of departmental proceedings has been passed. The departmental proceedings have been completed and the copies thereof have been placed on record by petitioner after obtaining the same through RTI. It is correct that proceedings conducted in a departmental enquiry do not have a bearing upon criminal proceedings but then what the petitioner is seeking to achieve by examining the witness, namely, Murtaza Ali is to bring to the fore the manner in which sampling and sealing has taken place in the instant case. Murtaza Ali, admittedly, has not been examined as witness before the trial court and he, during the departmental proceedings, has made certain observations and statements as regards the manner in which the sample was collected and sealed. His statement, therefore, is relevant to the case at hand. Admittedly, departmental enquiry was conducted after the decision of the trial court, as such, it would not have been in the knowledge of the petitioner that Murtaza Ali was in know of the facts relevant to the case. Therefore, there was no occasion for the petitioner to produce the said witness in defence during trial of t....