IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.35013 of 2010 Sardar Santosh Singh Versus State Of Bihar & Anr ---------------------------------- 2/ 12/12/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional P.P. for the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 20.12.2007 whereby learned lower court failed to accede with his prayer to have certain document accepted in terms of Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. The application of 294 should be permitted only in the case where the adversary did not dispute the genuinness of that very document as per Section 294(3) of the Cr.P.C.. Here, in the present case as is evident petitioner has tried to get a petition which was filed by informant before learned CJM dated 7.8.2007, exhibit of this record regarding which genuineness the informant did not accede. Simple submission on behalf of the petitioner is that informant is no where so far State case is concerned. It happens to be the prosecution conducted by State and so the objection whatever been raised on behalf of the informant is not at all maintainable. Learned APP opposed the prayer and submitted 2 that the aforesaid petition dated 7.8.2007 was filed by informant in his individual capacity before the learned CJM as per disclosure made by petitioner himself. The genuineness of the aforesaid document was never taken into consideration by the Investigating Authority during conduction of investigation and as such, the State neither was interested nor was in a position to ascertain the genuineness of the document. As such, the informant was the best person to say with regard to authenticity of the document in question which has rightly been protested by informant and the learned lower court has passed the impugned order after proper consideration of the dispute in hand. The status of the parties is irrelevant more particularly in present scenario when the petitioners are trying to get a petition filed on behalf of the informant in his individual capacity brought up on record in pursuance of Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, non acceptance of its genuineness by the informant who happens to be the aggrieved party has got some sort of relevancy in the present context. Consequent thereupon, it has rightly been held by the learned lower court that there happens to be non 3 application of Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, petition is found to be devoid of merit and is rejected. However, it will be open to the petitioners to get the aforesaid petition legally brought up on record if, he so desires, at proper stage of trial. perwez (Aditya Kumar Trivedi,J.)