- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL REVISION REVISION REVISION APPLICATION NO.286 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.286 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.286 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra ...Applicant vs. Barjor Buchiya ...Respondent Ms A.T.Javeri A.P.P. for State None for the respondent. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : APRIL 20,2009 : APRIL 20,2009 : APRIL 20,2009 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned A.P.P. for the applicant and the learned Advocate for the first respondent. At the fag end of the recording of evidence, a simple application was moved by the prosecution calling upon the defence either to admit or deny the certain documents which were sought to be tendered along with the said application. The said application was rejected. One of the grounds mentioned by the learned Judge is that the stage contemplated by section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 will come in the picture when the charge is framed and before commencement of recording of evidence of the prosecution. However, the application was made long after recording of evidence commenced. Considering the nature of prayers made in the application and the stage at which the said application was made, the final order passed on the said application cannot be faulted with. Hence, revision application is rejected. However, this order will not preclude the applicant from filing any application in accordance with law. - 2 - JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE