The High Court dismissed a revisional application challenging the JJB order refusing to produce original documents lying with the Criminal Court, holding the application infructuous as certified copies could be obtained from the competent court.
Revisional application dismissed. Petitioner at liberty to apply for certified copies from the Court where originals lie.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISIDCTION CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR
**
CRR/14/2021
The State … Petitioner
Vs.
Papi Baidya … Respondent Mr.Sumit Karmakar … for the State Mr. S.C.Mishra … for the respondent
April 20, 2022 [SR] Item No. 2
This revisional application has been filed by the petitioner under section 103 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 read with section 482 of Cr.P.C assailing the order No.31 dated 23.02.2021 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Port Blair in Misc. Case No.37/JJB of 2018 wherein learned Magistrate of Juvenile Justice Board, Port Blair rejected the prayer of the prosecution for calling the original documents lying in the record of GR Case No.1541 of 2018 from the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate at Port Blair.
Learned advocate for the State submitted that the impugned order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board is bad in law and illegal and is liable to be set aside. It is contended that the original documents and the charge sheet were lying in GR Case No.1541 of 2018 pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair and Xerox
2
copies were sent to Juvenile Justice Board. For such reason, the petitioner had prayed for calling for the case records from the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate but the same was disallowed. It is submitted that the records are lying within the jurisdiction of this Court and the same may be called for redressing the grievance of the petitioner and for the purpose of exhibiting the original documents.
Learned advocate for the respondent strongly opposed the prayer and submitted that when the original documents are lying in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the petitioner could file such application for certified copy before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair instead of seeking production of the original documents before the learned Principal Magistrate of the Juvenile Justice Board.
I have considered the submissions made by learned advocate for the parties. Perused the impugned order as well as the application challenging the order passed by the learned Principal Magistrate. If the purpose of the petitioner is to compare the Xerox copy of documents with the original documents lying with the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair, for exhibiting the Xerox copy, he was at liberty to take necessary steps before the said Court for obtaining certified copies instead of seeking production of such originals documents before the Juvenile Justice Board.
3
In my considered view, the present application of the petitioner is infructuous and I do not find any merit to interfere with the impugned order.
The revisional application is therefore dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to take steps to apply for certified copy of the same before the Court where the original documents are lying.
The parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this order.
(Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Juvenile Justice Board can be required to produce original documents lying with another court for comparison when certified copies are available.
Whether a revision under section 103 of the Juvenile Justice Act read with section 482 Cr.P.C. can succeed in this context.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The State
Papi Baidya
Ananda Kumar Mukherjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
