The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice Sanjiv Khanna observed that “The right to summon document(s), indeed, is available but that has to be exercised when the trial is in progress and not when the trial is completed, including after the statement of accused under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code had been recorded. The efficacy of the trial cannot be whittled down by such belated application.”
The Bench in the instant case is hearing to a Special leave for appeal(criminal) which is filed against the order of the High Court for the State of Telangana.
At the outset, in the instant case, an application for summoning of a document is filed before the trial court by the respondent in the present case which was rejected by the trial court on giving sound and tangible reasons.
Subsequently, on filing a revisional application in the high court by the respondent herein the decision of the trial court is reversed by the high court for the summoning of the document(s).
It is on this order and judgment of the high court that the present SLP is filed.
The counsel for the petitioner argued that “The application for summoning the document was moved only after the conclusion of the trial and after Section. 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 statement of accused is recorded and the high court has granted for relief for the summoning of document that too without laying the proper foundation for grant of such relief.”
The counsel for the respondent cited a judgment of the supreme court i.e., Girish Kumar Suneja versus. Central Bureau of Investigation where it is held that the order passed by the Trial Court was amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court.
After hearing both the parties Hon’ble bench set aside the judgment of the high court for the state of Telangana and restored the order of the trial court.
