Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 25

10. Amending section 510, Cr. P.C. to add these officers.-

The first solution1 may appear simple, but is not satisfactory. In the first place, with the exception of officers of the Mint (whom we propose2 to omit from section 510), the class of officers at present mentioned in section 510 do not fall in the same category as the officers of the India Security Press or of the Office of the Controller of Stamps. The latter class of officers are in possession of information contained in certain records of the State, which if divulged, may affect the very security or financial stability of the State. Such is not the case when a report is made in criminal cases by a Chemical Examiner, the Chief Inspector of Explosives, etc.

The report of such officers can only affect the parties to the case. Further, under sub-section (2) of section 510, if an application is made to the court in that behalf by either party, the court is bound to summon and examine any person mentioned in sub-section (1). It is true that the Law Commission, in an earlier Report3 has recommended that the summoning of these officers should be in the discretion of the court. But even if such a change is made, the officer concerned could, under section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act, be summoned to produce the documents on which his report is based and in such a case the section requires that he must bring the documents in court.

1. Para. 9(i), supra.

2. See App I, section 510.

3. 14th Report, Vol. II, para. 26.

Evidence of Officers about Forged Stamps, Currency Notes, etc Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys