Patna High Court
Jitu SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The cryptic order dated 07.07.2025 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the trial court to pass a reasoned order on the petition to mark the documents as exhibits.
Summary
Petitioners Jitu Singh and Karan Singh filed a criminal revision challenging a July 7, 2025 order of the District & Sessions Judge, Supaul, which dismissed their request to mark certain documents as exhibits in a trial arising from Supaul P.S. Case No. 402 of 2021. The documents pertained to contradictions in the informant's testimony before the Juvenile Justice Board and the informant's criminal antecedents, which the petitioners argued were relevant to the defence. The trial court rejected the petition without providing any reasoning, labeling the order as "cryptic". The High Court examined the lack of reasoning and found the order legally infirm, noting that the trial court must give reasons when rejecting evidentiary material. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the trial court to pass a fresh, reasoned order on the petition, and allowed the revision petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the Sessions Judge's order rejecting the petition to mark documents as exhibits, without providing reasons, is valid under procedural law.
- Whether the documents sought to be marked as exhibits are relevant to the trial concerning the informant's testimony and criminal antecedents.
- Whether the order should be set aside and the matter remitted for a fresh, reasoned decision.
Subjects
- Criminal Revision
- Evidentiary Relevance
- Procedural Fairness
- Juvenile Justice
- Document Admissibility
- Cryptic Order
- Remand
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.855 of 2025
======================================================
1. Jitu Singh S/o Raju Singh R/o Vill and Post- Sukhpur, Ward No. 12, P.S.-
Supaul, Distt- Supaul, Pincode- 852130, Bihar
2. Karan Singh @ Karan Kumar S/o Janta Singh R/o Vill and P.O. - Sukhpur,
P.S.- Supaul, Ward No. 12, Distt- Supaul, Pincode- 852130, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanjha Devi W/o Late Shivaji Mahto R/o Vill- Sukhpur, Ward No. 12, P.S.-
Supaul, Distt- Supaul, Pincode- 852130, Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Purushottam Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Tanushri, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 18-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. However,
after filing of vakalatnama there is no representation on behalf
of opposite party no. 2, though learned APP for the State is
present.
2. The present revision petition has been filed against
the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by learned District &
Sessions Judge, Supaul in Sessions Trial No. 39 of 2022, arising
out of Supaul P.S. Case No, 402 of 2021, whereby and
whereunder the learned trial court dismissed the petition dated
07.07.2025 filed by the petitioners for bringing on record certain
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.855 of 2025(4) dt.18-02-2026
2/4
documents on behalf of the defence.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
ER- 83/21, GR-1062/21 has arisen out of same Supaul P.S. Case
No. 402 of 2021. Learned counsel further submits that in the
said case the accused was child in conflict with law and the
learned Juvenile Justice Board has acquitted him. In the said
case, the informant was examined as P.W. 4 and there are certain
contradictions in the deposition of the informant as P.W. 4
before Juvenile Justice Board and as a prosecution witness in
Sessions Trial No. 39 of 2022 in which the present petitioners
are facing trial in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 402 of
2021. Similarly, the other documents sought to be brought on
record are concerning criminal antecedent of the informant. The
petitioners filed petition before the learned Sessions Judge for
marking these documents as exhibits, but by a cryptic order
dated 07.07.2025, the learned Sessions Judge rejected the prayer
holding that the documents are not relevant without giving any
description of the documents and without recording any finding
how the documents were not relevant. Learned counsel further
submits that the said order could not be sustained as it suffers
from illegality.
4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.855 of 2025(4) dt.18-02-2026
3/4
opposes the contention of the petitioners. Learned APP submits
that the documents brought on record are not relevant and the
learned trial court has rightly passed the order rejecting the
petition of the petitioners.
5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties and perused the record. The order
dated 07.07.2025 which has been impugned in this case reads as
under:-
"Both the accused persons file
attendance. Defence witness is absent.
Accused persons file a petition
with CC of documents praying therein order
to mark exhibit the documents but the same
is not relevant in this case. Hence, defence
evidence is closed.
Put up on 08.07.25."
6. Bare reading of the order shows the order is devoid
of any reasoning and it is acompletely cryptic order. Therefore,
without going into the merits of the contention of the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the order dated 07.07.2025 is set
aside and the matter is remitted to the learned trial court for
passing the order afresh on the petition of the petitioners dated
07.07.2025. The learned trial court is directed to furnish reasons
while passing the order.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.855 of 2025(4) dt.18-02-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, the present revision petition stands
allowed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
U T
Checking your session…