IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2148 of 2008() ------------------------- SC.328/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT(ADHOC)III, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------ 1. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, OLICKAL NIRAVEL VEETIL, KUMPALAMPOIKA, MALAYALAPPUZHA. 2. SASIDHARAN @ KADUVA SASI, S/O.KANNADI VEETIL, CHERADI, THAZAHAM, 3. SURENDRAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, ETTIMOOTIL VEETIL, VAYALATHALA MURI, CHERUKOL VILLAGE 4. RAJAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, OMANAALIL VEETIL, VAYALATHALA MURI, CHERUKOL VILLAGE, 5. PRASANNAN, S/O.VELAYDHAN, KOCHUTHUNDIL PUTHEN VEETIL, PATTOOR, NOORANAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2148 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June 2008 O R D E R The petitioners are accused in S.C.No.328/06 pending before the Fast Track Court -III, Pathanamthitta. According to the petitioners, Annexures 2 and 3 are reports dated 29/12/2002 and 02/01/2004 submitted by the investigating officer before the learned Magistrate in the course of investigation. The case has now reached in the stage of trial. According to the petitioners, the reports dated 29/12/2002 and 02/01/2004 have contents which are helpful to the petitioners; but the investigating officer , in the course of his examination did not admit having submitted those reports. However, the officer who submitted the charge had conceded that these reports were submitted to the court. The grievance of the petitioners is that the learned Sessions Judge has not assigned any numbers to these documents. They pray that these reports may be marked by assigning numbers to them and the same may be sent to the expert along with admitted signatures and handwriting of the investigating officer to ascertain the truth. 2. The trial is in progress. It is for the learned Magistrate to appreciate whether the statement of the witnesses Crl.M.C.No.2148/08 2 about the genuineness of Annexures 2 and 3 which are available in the court records can be accepted or not. I am not persuaded to agree that at this moment and at this stage of trial, these documents need be sent to the expert. The learned Magistrate will certainly consider the contentions of the petitioners that Annexures 2 and 3 which are available in court records must be reckoned as documents in their support and even without formal marking, those documents have to be looked into as they are documents available in the custody of the court and have already been shown to the witnesses. The alleged maker of the document and he was confronted with the same also. 3. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that no further directions are necessary in the matter. The petitioners can advance arguments on the strength of Annexures 2 and 3 (after requesting the learned Judge to assign a number to identify them) before the learned Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge shall consider such arguments and shall take appropriate decision. 4. This Crl.M.C is in these circumstances dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2148/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.2148/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo.9099/02 ORDER 04/06/2008