MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, J.---The above titled revision petition has been directed against the order of District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction Kotli dated 10.09.2016, whereby the application filed by the accused-respondents for attaching the injury memos and medical reports of the respondents along with the challan file, was accepted.
2. Precise facts forming background of the instant revision petition are that the accused- respondents are facing trial in a case registered against them in offences under sections 302, 324, 337/D, 201, 337/F-1, 34, A.P.C. and 13/20/65, A.O. before District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction Kotli. The case was at the stage of recording the prosecution evidence. On 20.03.2015, accused-respondents filed an application for A attaching injury memo and medical reports, upon which the petitioner/complainant filed objection. The learned trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties accepted the application and directed the police to attach the injury memo and medical reports which was part of the police file in the case file vide its order dated 10.09.2016, hence this revision petition.
3. Abdul Salam Ch, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant argued that trial Court committed grave illegality while recording the impugned order. He further argued that fake and fictitious injury memo and medical reports were prepared by the accused-respondents. The learned counsel contended that if the accused-respondents were injured in the occurrence, they might have got registered a separate FIR or filed private complaint, but they failed to do so. The order passed by the learned trial Court for attaching the documents with the Court file will affect the whole case of the prosecution. Finally, the learned counsel prayed that by accepting the revision petition, the impugned order may be set aside. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel referred the following authorities:-
1. 2008 YLR 1144.
2. PLD 2009 (Lah) 218.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused-respondents defended the impugned order and referred a case reported as PLD 2007 SC(AJ&K) 72.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case with utmost care.
6. A careful consideration of the record reveals that an application was filed by the accused- respondents Tariq Mehmood and Basharat for attaching their injury memos and medical reports present in the police file in the Court file and making part of it, while accepting the application the learned trial Court ordered the police to produce the documents and place the same along with the case file of the trial Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that it was not proper time for placing the medical reports and injury memo of the accused-respondents along with the Challan file. According to his version, the accused-respondents cannot be allowed to file those documents which favour the accused with the file of the case. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is misconceived and not tenable due to simple reason that it is the basic duty of the investigating Officer to place on record all the relevant documents or other evidence collected during investigation whether it favours the accused or prosecution before the competent Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner himself referred a case reported as PLD 2009 Lah 218, wherein it was held as under;- "Investigating Officer would not make any accused person guilty or innocent as his job is only to collect some material and to place it before the competent Court, which can declare an accused guilty or innocent".
So, when it is alleged by the accused party that at the time of occurrence, accused Bashrat and Tariq were also injured and the injury memos were prepared by the I.O. and the M.L.R. were obtained by him, then at the time of filing challan it was duty of the police to annex these documents along with the Challan, irrespective of the fact whether these documents support prosecution version or defence. It is for the trial Court to look into these documents and evaluate their evidentiary worth and effects upon the case. But these documents are necessary to reach at just conclusion of the case. The I.O. had no authority to withheld the same. He should have made them the part of the report filed under section 173, Cr.P.C. (Challan). When the injury memos of the accused-respondents were prepared by the investigating Officer and the medical reports were also part of the police file, than the investigating Officer was bound to place the same along with ChalIan. Furthermore, it is relevant to mention here that, the job of the Investigating Officer is to collect the evidentiary material and to place it before the competent Court, which decides the fate of the case after giving opportunity to the parties, for pleading the case, only a competent Court can declare whether a person is guilty or innocent. Therefore, in such circumstances the learned trial Court has rightly allowed to attach the application filed by the accused-respondents.
7. The other contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the complainant was the aggressor in the occurrence, then the accused-respondents might have filed a private complaint has no relevance due to simple reason that nobody can be compelled to file a private complaint in the Court. The trial Court after taking evidence from both the parties would be able to determine the genuineness or falsehood of the medical reports, injury memo and their bearing on the prosecution case at the time of recording the final judgment. So, the c apprehension of the learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant that documents if allowed by the Court to be a part of file might affect the case of the petitioner is also premature and unfounded, therefore, the same is hereby repelled. In my opinion no illegality or irregularity having been found in the impugned order, as such the same is allowed to stand.
In the light of what has been stated above, finding no force in this revision petition, it is hereby dismissed.