If statement under sec.161of Cr.P.C. not supplied to the accused with challan/charge-sheet.

 

Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.” The
provision no doubt requires the prosecution to furnish the copies of the statements of the persons whose
evidence is required to be recorded in the case. The purpose behind this is obviously to enable the accused to
meet the case that the witness is likely to say before the Court and enable him to properly cross-examine him
in view of his previous statement made before the investigating office

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Gujarat High Court
Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Thacker Kaku And Ors. on 16 September, 1965
Equivalent citations: AIR 1966 Guj 217, 1966 CriLJ 990, (1966) 0 GLR 829
Author: N Shelat
Bench: N Shelat, A Sarela
JUDGMENT
N.G. Shelat, J.
1. to 8. xx xx xx
9. With regard to the evidence of Gulabrai, it was urged by Mr. Mankad, the learned advocate appearing for
respondent No. 1, that his statement recorded by the investigating officer in the case was not supplied to the
accused as is required under Section 173 Sub-section (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code and that
consequently the probative value of his evidence would be materially affected. Sub-section (4) of Section 173
of the Criminal Procedure Code provides as under.-
After forwarding a report under this Section, the officer in charge of the police station shall, before the
commencement of the inquiry or trial, furnish or cause to be furnished to the accused, free of cost, a copy of
the report for-worded under Sub-section (1) and of the first information report recorded under Section 184 and
of all other documents or relevant extract thereof, on which the prosecution proposes to rely, including the
statements and confessions, if any recorded under Section 164 and the statements recorded under Sub-section
(3) of Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.” The
provision no doubt requires the prosecution to furnish the copies of the statements of the persons whose
evidence is required to be recorded in the case. The purpose behind this is obviously to enable the accused to
meet the case that the witness is likely to say before the Court and enable him to properly cross-examine him
in view of his previous statement made before the investigating officer. The Chapter XVIII of the Criminal
Procedure Code relates to the procedure to be followed by the Magistrate in inquiries preparatory to
commitment, in respect of proceedings instituted on a police report received by him under Section 173 of the
Criminal Procedure Code. Sub-section (3) of Section 207A of the Criminal Procedure Code then provides that

“At the commencement of the inquiry, the Magistrate shall, when the accused appears or is brought before
him, satisfy himself that the documents referred to in Section 173 have been furnished to the accused and If he
finds that the accused has not been furnished with such documents or any of them, he shall cause the same to
be so furnished.”
A similar provision is contained in Section 251A of the Criminal Procedure Code, laying down procedure to
be adopted in the trial of warrant cases instituted on a police report, by the Magistrate. If appears from these
provisions that the obligation is cast on the Magistrate to satisfy himself that the documents referred to in
Section 173 have been furnished to the accused and if he finds that the accused has not been furnished with
such documents or any of them he shall cause the same to be so furnished In light of these provisions the
grievance of the accused as urged by Mr. K. N. Mankad for the respondent No. 1, has to be examined. Now it
is not suggested, much less said that the committing Magistrate had not made inquiry from the accused and
not satisfied in that respect. It has to be taken that the procedure as required in law was followed by him and
he had satisfied himself that the accused had recited all such statements as contemplated under Section 173(4)
read with Section 207A, Sub-section (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code The charge-sheet submitted by the
police in the case described the name of the witness Gulabrai as one of the witnesses to be examined for
prosecution in the case. When that was so, and if the accused had in fact not received the police statement of
witness Gulabrai. it was necessary for the accused to move the committing Magistrate before committal of the
accused to the Court of Sessions, that they have not received such a statement, and if they failed to do so then,
State Of Gujarat vs Thacker Kaku And Ors. on 16 September, 1965

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: