- 1 - 108ponda rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.108 OF 2011 Mr.Prakash Daulatram Chandwani .. Applicant vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.A.H.H.Ponda for Applicant Ms.M.R.Tidke APP for Respondent-State CORAM: N.D.DESHPANDE, J DATE: 6th April, 2011 PER COURT 1. Heard Mr.Ponda, learned counsel for the applicant. The applicant is an accused facing trial and on his behalf a witness is being cross examined on the point of Anticipatory Bail Application which he admitted to have filed. The applicant intends to file a certified copy of the bail application which is part of the court proceedings and made an application which is Exhibit A page 9 filed along with the - 2 - 108ponda application. Such application was not allowed for production of the documents in defence. The applicant intends to prove the contents in the said application which was admitted to have been filed in order to contradict PW 9. Thus, according to him it is required to test his veracity for one or other reasons. The scope of cross examination as it is understood is wider. Said application seems to have been not decided on its merits but, it was rejected as seen from the order on the application because his objection was overruled while recording cross examination. This is improper way of rejection of application. The trial court is therefore directed to take said certified copy of the application on record along with an application for documentary evidence on record and decide the admissibility for reading into the evidence in accordance with law, at the time - 3 - 108ponda of hearing of the case, In the light of above observations, learned counsel for the applicant may be allowed to put such questions which is relevant to the issue. Application is accordingly disposed. (N.D.Deshpande,J)