CRM No.M-30495 of 2010 (O & M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM No.M-30495 of 2010 (O & M) Date of decision : 25.8.2011 Nisha Rani ........Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and others ......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present:- Mr.R.K.Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr.B.S.Saini, Senior DAG, Haryana Mr.G.S.Chahal, Advocate, for Mr.Jagwinder Sandhu, Advocate, for private respondents --- AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition challenges order dated 3.3.2010 Annexure P-7 passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Guhla, District Kaithal and order dated 6.8.2010 Annexure P-8 passed by revisional Court. The private respondents are facing trial in case FIR No.166 dated 15.11.2003 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Siwan, Tehsil Guhla, District Kaithal. It seems that there was some civil dispute which was relevant to be considered for adjudication of the case on the criminal side. The allegations appear to be in regard to land. Nisha-the petitioner alongwith another person filed a civil suit against respondents. Copy of judgment has been placed on record as Annexure P-4. Since the civil litigation pleadings and the judgment rendered by civil Court were relevant to be considered by the Court trying the criminal CRM No.M-30495 of 2010 (O & M) -2- case, application under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 was made which was dismissed vide impugned order Annexure P-7. The ground taken by the trial Court for dismissing the application is that the documents sought to be brought on record, are not a part of report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The witnesses have not been cited in the list of witnesses. The challan was filed in December 2004. Civil Court judgment and decree were rendered on 4.11.2009. In such circumstances, there was no occasion to produce the said documents because they are result of later developments. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has not been able to deny the relevance of the documents. Considering the fact that manifest injustice would be caused and the trial Court would be deprived of taking into account the adjudication by civil Court, it would be in the interest of justice to allow the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. In view of the above, this petition is allowed. Orders dated 3.3.2010 Annexure P-7 and dated 6.8.2010 Annexure P-8 are hereby quashed. The prosecution would be given liberty to produce evidence, as prayed for in application dated 16.12.2009 Annexure P-5. (AJAI LAMBA) JUDGE 25.8.2011 akm