1. RAZA ALI KHAN, J.---This revision petition has been filed against the order passed by the learned District Criminal Court Bhimber , dated 23.01.2019, whereby , the application filed for including documents mentioned in the application along with challan has been rejected.
2. Precise facts of the case are that during pendency of challan submitted by Police Station Barnala in pursuance of F.I.R. No.127/2018, the petitioner herein, filed an application on 27.11.2018 for including the documents mentioned in the application with the challan. The other side filed objections on the application on 03.12.2018. The learned trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, rejected the application through the impugned order dated 23.01.2019, hence, the captioned revision petition.
3. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner argued that there was a dispute over a piece of land between the parties and many civil and criminal cases were sub judice, therefore, as per prosecution case, the motive behind the murder was the litigation between the parties. The learned Advocate further argued that to prove motive behind the occurrence, the documents sought to be placed on record are necessary to be tendered in evidence but the court below failed to understand the controversy and illegally rejected the application through telegraphic order which is liable to be set-aside.
4. The learned Advocate appearing for the respondents argued that no provision of law provides any procedure/method to place on record documents after submission of challan before the trial Court. The learned Advocate further argued that the docum ents sought to be placed on record are not necessary to resolve the controversy , hence, the Court below rightly rejected the same.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case.
6. A perusal of the record reveals that the complainant specifically alleged in the F.I.R. that motive behind the occurrence is disputes over the land. In my considered view, to prove the motive behind the occurrence, the documents sought to be placed on record are necessary to be tendered. This is a case of last scene evidence and in such like cases, the motive has necessarily to be proved for conviction of an accused.
7. The argument of the learned counsel for the respondents that there is no provision of law in the Code of Criminal Procedure which empowers the Court to receive any document after the submission of report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has no substance. Under section 94 of the Cr.P.C., whenever any Court or any. Officer In Charge of a Police Stations considers that production of any document or other things is necessary or desirable for the purpose of investigation, trial such Court may issue summons to place the same on the record. For convenience section 94, Cr.P.C. is reproduced as under: "94. Summons to produce document or other thing: (1) Whenever any Court, or, any officer incharge of police- station considers that the production of any document or other thing is necessary or desirable for the purposes of, any investigation, inquiry , trial or other proceeding under this Code by or before such Court or officer, such Court may issue a summons, or such officer a written order , to the person in whose possession or power such document or thing is believed to be, requiring him to attend and produce it or to produce it, at the time and place stated in the summons or order .
8. Provided that no such officer shall issue any such order requiring the production of any document or other thing which is in the custody of a bank or banker as defined in the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891(XVII of 1891), and relates, or might disclose any information which relates to the bank account of any person except---
(a) for the purpose of investigating an offence under sections 403, 406, 408 and 409 and Sections 421 to 424 (both inclusive) and Sections 465 to 477-A (both inclusive) of the Pakistan Penal Code, with prior permission in writing of a Sessions Judge; and
(b) in other cases, with the prior permission in writing of the High Court.
(2) Any person required under this section merely to produce a document or other thing shall be deemed to have complied with the requisition if he causes such document or thing to be produced instead of attending personally to produce the same.
(3) Nothing in this section shall be deeme d to affect the Evidence Act, 1872, Sectio ns 123 and 124, or to apply to a letter , postcard, telegram or other document or any parcel or thing in the custody of the Postal or Telegraph Authorities."
9. A perusal of above reproduced provision of law reveals that if the production of any document is necessary or desirable for the purposes of any trial under the Criminal Procedure Code by or before such Court, such Court may issue summons to the person in whose possession or power such document is believed to be requiring him to attend and produce it or produce it at the time and place stated in the summons. Thus, a wide discretion has been conferred on the Court enabling it during the course of trial to issue summons to a person in whose possession or power a document is believed to be requi ring him to produce before it, if the Court considers that the production of such document is necessary or desirable for the purpose of such trial, such power can be exercised by the Court at any stage of trial before judgment is delivered and Court must exercise the power if the production of document is necessary and desirable for the proper decision and for administration of justice. There can be no bar for the Court to permit a document to be taken on record irrespective of fact that it was not filed along with report under section 173, Cr.P.C. or charge sheet. I am of the view that it is the duty of the Court to take all steps necessary for the production of such documents before it.
10. Like that under section 540, Cr.P.C., any Court may, at any stage of trial under the Cr.P.C., summon any person as a witness or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall or re-examine already examined and the Court shall summon and examine or recall or re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to be essential for just decision of the case. Under this provision wider discretion has been conferred upon the Court to exercise its powers and paramount consideration is just decision of the case. In my opinion, under this provision, it is permissible for the Court even to order the production of document before it, or accept any document if it is essential for the just decision of the case.
11. It is well settled that goal of criminal trial is to discover the truth and to achieve the goal the best possible evidence is to be brought on record. In view of the aforesaid legal proposition, it is clear that additional evidence, oral or documentary can be produced during the course of trial if in the opinion of the Court production of it is essential for the proper disposal of the case. I am of the view that the documents sought to be placed on record are necessary to be produced to prove the motive as has been alleged in the F I R. It was the responsibility of the Investigating Officer to annex these documents with the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. (challan) and investigate the matter in this regard too, because the complainant specifically mentioned in the F.I.R. that the motive behind the occurrence is land dispute between the parties and he alleged that during course of investigation he submitted aforesaid documents but unfortunately these documents were not brought on record. The complainant cannot be penalized for the fault of Investigating Officer because if ultimately it is opined that the motive behind the occurrence is not proved in absence of any documentary evidence then there would be no alternate for the prosecution and he will suffer for the fault of Investigating Officer. It is worth to mention here that defen ce has opportunity to rebut the aforesaid documents during course of trial and relevancy of aforesaid documents may be adjudged by the trial Court at the time of final adjudication, so both sides have full opportunity to prove and disprove the documents during the trial proceedings.
12. In view of above, the revision petition stands accepted and while setting aside the impugned order dated 23.01.2019, the application filed by the complainant/ petitioner herein for production of documents with challan stands accepted.