Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dhanraj Nagdive, filed a criminal writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, challenging the order dated 21/07/2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Amravati, in Criminal Appeal No.100/2023. The Sessions Judge had rejected the petitioner's application at Exh.21, filed under Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking permission to lead additional evidence by examining Chandrapal Meshram. The background of the case involves a dispute over a plot of land. The petitioner was the Secretary of Pradnya Magasvargiya Gruh Nirman Sahakari Sanstha, and respondent No.2 was the President. It was alleged that respondent No.2 sold plot No.8-B to Harihar Shankarrao Anasane for Rs.70,000/- without the consent of the society members, by preparing false documents, and that the plot was allotted to Chandrapal Meshram. The petitioner filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC, leading to registration of FIR No.282/2013 against respondent No.2 for offences under Sections 420, 468, 471, 403, and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. After investigation, charge-sheet No.182/2013 was filed. The petitioner sought to examine Chandrapal Meshram as additional evidence in the appeal. The Sessions Judge rejected the application. The High Court, after hearing the parties, set aside the impugned order and allowed the application, directing the Sessions Judge to permit the petitioner to examine Chandrapal Meshram as additional evidence and to decide the appeal afresh.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Additional Evidence in Appeal - Section 391 CrPC - Necessity for Just Decision - The appellate court must consider whether additional evidence is necessary for a just decision of the case. Rejection without proper application of mind and without recording reasons is unsustainable. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Sessions Judge was justified in rejecting the application under Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for permission to lead additional evidence by examining Chandrapal Meshram.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order dated 21/07/2025, and directed the learned Sessions Judge to permit the petitioner to examine Chandrapal Meshram as additional evidence and to decide the appeal afresh.
Law Points
- Section 391 CrPC
- Additional evidence in appeal
- Necessity for just decision
- Application of mind by appellate court
Case Details
2025 LawText (BOM) (09) 194
Criminal Writ Petition No. 694 of 2025
Mr. U.V. Chakravarty for Petitioner, Ms. S.N. Thakur for Respondent No.1/State
Dhanraj s/o. Rajaramji Nagdive
State of Maharashtra, Rambhau s/o. Hambarji Patil
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging rejection of application for additional evidence in appeal.
Remedy Sought
Quashing and setting aside the order dated 21/07/2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Amravati, in Criminal Appeal No.100/2023, rejecting the application at Exh.21 for permission to lead additional evidence.
Filing Reason
The petitioner sought to examine Chandrapal Meshram as additional evidence in the appeal, which was rejected by the Sessions Judge.
Previous Decisions
The learned Sessions Judge, Amravati, rejected the application at Exh.21 under Section 391 CrPC for additional evidence.
Issues
Whether the learned Sessions Judge was justified in rejecting the application under Section 391 CrPC for additional evidence.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the additional evidence of Chandrapal Meshram was necessary for just decision of the appeal.
The respondent/State opposed the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The appellate court must consider the necessity of additional evidence for a just decision. Rejection without proper application of mind and without recording reasons is unsustainable.
Judgment Excerpts
The present Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The petitioner is praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 21/07/2025 passed below Exh.21 by the learned Sessions Judge, Amravati, in Criminal Appeal No.100/2023, wherein the application at Exh.21, preferred under Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for permission to lead additional evidence by examining Chandrapal Meshram came to be rejected.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC before the JMFC, Amravati, leading to registration of FIR No.282/2013. After investigation, charge-sheet No.182/2013 was filed. The petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.100/2023 before the Sessions Judge, Amravati, and filed an application at Exh.21 under Section 391 CrPC for additional evidence, which was rejected on 21/07/2025. The petitioner then filed the present criminal writ petition.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 391, Section 156(3)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 420, Section 468, Section 471, Section 403, Section 406
- Constitution of India: Article 227
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Section 528
