' This petition is directed against the order, dated 27-10-2003 for the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gujrat seized of the trial in the case registered vide F.I.R. No.537, dated 19-10-2002 under sections 302/324/148/149, P. P.C. Police Station Dinga, District Gujrat on the application of the accused summoned the log book on the ground "accused has unlimited right to cross-examine the Investigating Officer including about log books. In the interest of justice, the said record is essential for just decision of the case and fair trial".
2. None has appeared for respondents Nos. 3 to 8 despite notice.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the log book record could not have been summoned as the prosecution evidence was still being recorded, that in the application filed by the accused no tenable grounds have been urged to summon the record, that the case of the prosecution is likely to be prejudiced in case the log book is brought on record or the defence counsel is permitted to cross-examine the Investigating Office with reference to the log book.
4. Learned Addl. Advocate-General submits that he had no prior notice of this and would not be in a position to assist. Since this petition has arisen out of an interim order and case is pending trial I am not inclined to adjourn it any further and proceed to decide it.
5. I have gone through the application filed by the accused for summoning the log book. In the entire body of the petition no tenable ground has been urged to justify the requisitioning of the log book. Observation of the learned trial Court that "the accused has unlimited right to cross-examine the Investigating Officer including about log books', is not tenable as the right of cross-examine a witness is regulated not only by the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code but also by the Qanun- e-Shahadat Order, 1984 particularly Article 140. The log book of wireless record is not one of those documents copies of which have to be supplied to the accused before the commencement of trial under section 265-C of the Cr.P.C. Thus the accused could not have requisitioned the record as of right. The impugned order, therefore, is not sustainable and the same is set aside. However, the application of the respondent accused shall be deemed to be pending and the learned trial Court shall decide the case after taking into consideration, the mandate of various provisions of procedural law inter alia under sections 162 and 265-C, Cr.P.C. And Article 140 of the Qanun-e- Shahadat Order 1984.