IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1058 of 2010 PHULAN CHAUDHARY son of Dedanand Chaudhary, resident of village- Navtolia, Police station- Bhawanipur (Bihpur), District- Bhagalpur. . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Superintendent of Police, District- Bhagalpur. 4. Officer-in-charge, Bihpur police station, Police station- Bihpur. . . . . Respondents. ----------- 2/ 08.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. In the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for supply of police papers as provided under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. Petitioner is one of the named accused of Bihpur P.S. case no. 23 of 2003 dated 18.02.2003 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner and other accused persons vide charge-sheet no. 57 of 2005 dated 26.04.2005. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Naugachhia took cognizance and summoned the accused persons including the petitioner to face trial. Learned counsel submits that in his absence, the case was committed to the court of Sessions and ultimately sent to the file of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Naugachia vide order dated 31.03.2006 giving rise to Sessions Case No. 463 of 2006. He further submits that on 04.08.2007, as the petitioner had not appeared, this case was separated bearing S.T. No. 463 A of 2006. He further submits that petitioner was ultimately arrested on 16.03.2009 and produced before the court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Naugachia, thereafter he was remanded to judicial custody. 2 Learned counsel submits that charge was framed on 07.04.2009 even without providing any police paper from the court to defend in the trial. As no police paper has been given to the petitioner, he is handicapped in putting his defence. Learned counsel submits that the witnesses have been examined without providing police paper. He further submits that the petitioner may be permitted to cross-examine the witnesses after supply of police paper Counsel for the State submits that if the petitioner is aggrieved by non-supply of police paper or framing of charge, he should have raised his grievance immediately before the court below. Heard counsel for the parties, in view of prayer made, this Court is of the view that police paper should be supplied to the petitioner. The prosecution and the court should take steps for providing Xerox copy of police paper to the petitioner. The petitioner would cooperate in the trial. However, it will be open for the petitioner to make prayer before the court below for cross-examination of the witnesses, which would be considered on its own merit. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of. Let this order be sent to the court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Naugachia in S.T. No. 463 A of 2006 arising out of Bihpur P.S. case no. 23 of 2003 through Fax at the cost of the petitioner. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)