Power of magistrate to call upon records of high court
rishabh
(Querist) 25 March 2014
This query is : Resolved
I filed a complaint regarding forgery of some documents.
The original documents are under the possession of accused.But these were used as genuine evidence before High Court of Delhi.
I listed the concerned clerk of the High court in the list of witness to attend and produce the relevant record/petition containing those forged documents.
Interestingly, the petition under possession of High Court is also dubious and it was never scanned & preserved in the digital form as per existing rules.
Now,the magistrate has ordered me to file certifed copies of the same documents alleged to be forged, showing lack of powers to call upon the documents under possession of the High Court.
The magistrate is helping the concerned persons to escape from their duty of bringing the forged documents in person, as they will have to depose in the court,while submitting the concerned record.
Is there any restriction or lack of powers in the code, that a M.M.can not call upon the concerned clerk of High Court, if he possesses a vital evidence of the case ?
Can accused be compelled to bring the forged document under his possession at the stage of pre summoning evidence ?
Can magistrate use his powers under section 91 CRPC to call upon the accused compelling him to bring the forged documents?
Kindly clarify the concerned law.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 25 March 2014
Why do not you produce the xerox certified copy of the documents. It is much easier to do so.
rishabh
(Querist) 25 March 2014
i wanna ask whether the law/code restricts the M.M. from calling upon the relevant records from High Court?
if the document bearing the original signatures of the accused is available and it does not fall within the exceptions contained in Indian evidence act, then secondary evidence is not admissible and original document will have to be produced. So, what is the harm in calling upon the original petition from the High Court?
rishabh
(Querist) 26 March 2014
it is not an academic query.The facts of the case had been stated earlier.
The original query still remains unsolved.
