IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6576 of 2010 LATHER BIND @ CHANDRAMA BIND Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 5.5.2010 Heard. The case is almost at the verge of conclusion. The impediment is that the Judicial Magistrate who recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and the Doctor who examined her medically have not been produced for their evidence. The original copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. being the record of an act of a public servant in discharge of his official duties enjoined upon him by law, may be admitted without examining the Magistrate. The learned Judge trying the case shall mark that statement exhibit. The purpose and use of statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. is only to seek corroboration of contradiction of the maker of that statement. The Judicial Magistrate is not required to be produced and examined. As regards the non-examination of the Doctor, the court below shall consider the issue in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 1981 CRI. L.J.1 Harpal Singh and another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and mark the injury/medical report in respect of the victim as exhibit under Section 35 of the Evidence Act. As regards the prayer for bail, considering the allegation and considering that by following the procedure as has been directed to be followed the Court would be in a position of 2 delivering a judgment in a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the present order either on account of being transmitted or on account of being produced, it is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)