criwp743.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 743 OF 2011 Deviprasad s/o Ramchandra Jangid .. PETITIONER VERSUS Gaurishankar s/o Devilal Sharma & another .. RESPONDENTS Mr. P.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.B. Joshi, advocate for respondent no. 1. ===== CORAM : A.V. POTDAR, J. DATE : 28 th SEPTEMBER 2011 PER COURT : 1 Heard. 2 By present writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Criminal Appeal no. 32/2008 below exh. 76. 3 Present petitioner filed an appeal against the order of conviction recorded by the trial Magistrate for offence punishable under section 138 of criwp743.11 2 the Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears that in the said appeal, an application is moved with a prayer that the application may be allowed and the document placed on record at exh. 30 before the trial court be exhibited at the stage of appeal. Perusal of the record shows that those documents were not tendered or referred in the cross examination of the complainant or witness of the complainant. After evidence of the complainant / prosecution was over, present petitioner / accused was examined under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Copy of the examination of the petitioner / accused under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is placed on record. In answer to question no. 12 “Do you want to examine yourself on oath ?” the petitioner has answered in negative. In answer to question no. 13 “Do you want to lead evidence on oath ?”, the petitioner has answered in negative. Petitioner raised his defence in response to question no. 14 “Do you want to state anything about this case ?”. There also he has not referred the documents which he intends to be exhibited at the appellate stage. Thus, one fact is clear that the documents which were produced before the lower court alongwith exhibit 13 are not the documents referred in the cross examination of the complainant, nor the documents tendered in his examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. criwp743.11 3 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner intends to rely on section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure speaks about seeking permission of the appellate court to lead additional evidence or to tender documents at the appellate stage. It appears that the prayer made in the application is in terms that the documents which were produced before the lower court be exhibited. Considering the prayer in the application, application does not cover under the ambit of section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and, if it is so, the order passed rejecting the application filed by the petitioner before the trial court does not warrant any interference. Writ petition stands dismissed as sans merit, without notice to the other side. ( A. V. POTDAR ) JUDGE dyb