CF0000087887 ^ A/' <•? ^y'' L',p,y\ :\/^ IN TIiE HIGH'COURT OF JUDICATURE AT JABAL'PUR, M.p. Criainal Revision I'io.l^ Uttam Kumar Sghu S/o Pyarelal Sahu, aged abou-b 50 years, by occupatioa- Servant, R/o village Pendri, P.S, Lalbagh, Distt. Rajnandgaon, a"t present •Bhat.apara, -Uistt. P^ipur, (M.P.). -versus- o£ 2000. PE'riTIONER. Sta.te of Madhya Pradesh, ... RESPONDEKT CRll'.m'iAL REVISION UHDER SECTION 597/401 OF THE CODE OF CRIMMAL PROCEDURE, 1975. X:-liC-22 fil; •g-St ^iTq]?(<f, 'g-arOTg, Ti5!^R-(q< s- 'd'll^:?1 i-!S(Cj'} "tWRIT WfSR ,»n.*-..AWBit<. m"s 3TCTq5I j i<i-11<* 3TCT aTRWgfts? snt?! •B'CTW ?rf?g ^PifepiFT TTrtRtr'? fe^t TfiRZR •Ep 3ipOT 3nt?i D.K.Gwalre, learejed R.K«Ja,]odiya,lear|aed from the also filed before the trial eounsel £or the a counsel for the frami.ng of the charge punish|able under Section 15 o£ the N.D.P.S. Aet. Ajay Gupta to heifl and as; managanertt of his business letter in .for the applicant Excise Deparjtment had issued a sanctionsd' the said Aj, the otber hand le the aH&teiEtii.sa Tbe documents on whi^h yery applicant have yet ncjt been lith the petition which were appear |was enployed by the licencee 'ist' thesaid licencee in the laad on the application of said are taken would not be rned counsel for the on. strang reliance 1s placed proved and would be 3)i^!>| iiach (ly?3^<iW) ' 3Tit?r^T R-li'* •silt^l antsi 'S^iWf^s <^i^41'T ~t^^t ^f lTE?t T^R?R ^arfigiTsiR? --24 ' ' • ! . !':^ I required to be proved ^uring tbe course o.f the trial. Productioa o£ a docunealj is not its proCf. Tbe eontents o£ the docuaent will hat|e to be proved by the applicant after summoning the de.fsnce witnesses. At this stage, it cannot be said that 1}he Court below was unjustified in framing the charges. On ^ie meritSe I a4 unable to interfere in the order passed by the lea^ned Court below. It is,however, directed that i£ tbe appllicant makes a request.1;o the learaed trial Court for (sununonirig the defence witaesses, 1 especially his employer'Ajay Gupta and soae officers from Excise Department, especially the Asst.Coaniissioner(Excise) Raipur, tben, the said witnesses would.be summoned tbrough tbe agency of the Courtjand the Court stiall see that not only the witnesses ae-e served, but are kept in attendance 1 ' ' ' ' "i' JH^m i i ~ so that the appllcant m^y exaaine thaa as bis defence witnesses. j The petition witii •(he observatioa a.foresaid is dismissed. , C.C. today. | ---Ad^r^^L^^lS -S37-~ ;.3. Judge 6-T