been marked on the sketch-map, Ext. Ka-9 as the place where the deceased received his injuries. In the first place, the map itself is not to scale but is merely a rough sketch and therefore one cannot postulate that the spot marked on the map is in exact relation to the platform. In the second place, the mark on the sketch-map was put by the SubInspector who was obviously not an eyewitness to the incident. He could only have put it thereafter taking the statements of the eyewitnesses. The marking of the spot on the sketch map is really bringing on record the conclusion of the Sub Inspector on the basis of the statements made by the witnesses to him. This, in our opinion, would not be admissible in view of the provisions of Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for it is in effect nothing more than the statement of the SubInspector that the eyewitnesses told him that the deceased was at such and such place at the time when he was hit. The sketch-map would be admissible so far as it indicates all that the SubInspector saw himself at the spot; but any mark put on the sketch-map based on the statements made by the witnesses to the Sub-Inspector would be inadmissible in view of the clear provisions of Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as it will be no more than a statement made to the Police during investigation. We may in this connection refer to Bhagirathi Chowdhury v. King Emperor 1925 SCC OnLine Cal 91 : AIR 1926 Cal 550, where it was observed that placing of maps before the jury containing statements of witnesses or of information received by the investigating officer preparing the map from other persons was improper and that the investigating officer who made a map in a criminal case ought not to put anything more than what he had seen himself. The same view was expressed by the Calcutta High Court again in Ibra Akanda v. Emperor 1944 SCC OnLine Cal 12 : AIR 1244 Cal 339, where it was held that any information derived from witnesses during police investigation, and recorded in the index to a map, must be proved by the witnesses concerned and not by the investigating officer, and that if such information is sought to be proved by the evidence of the investigating officer, it would manifestly offend against Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”
