LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     18 May 2010

New Provisio in 242 CrPc a Giant step in Criminal Law

Insertion of the provisio in Section 242 of the Criminal Procedure Code, is a giant step in the Criminal Law, as many could not grasps the meaning of Case Diary under section 172 of the CrPc which is regarded as a privelege of the Court and the Prosecution only and not the defense Counsel, and as a result of this the defense Cousel were denied the statements of the witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer in case diary which consists of two parts one the statements of the witnesses and the other consistings of day to day actions of the IO of the case that is entered in the case Diary. And in such a trial without the statements of the winesses the defense Counsel has to act like a blind man trying to catch a sparrow.And this is despite the rulings of the supreme Court that accused is entitled to get the copies of the statements of the witnesses and not the second parts of the case diary. By inserting the new provision in section 242 of the Criminal procedure Code, it is now very claer on this subjects, and Parliament has done the right things by inserting the provisio in section 242 of the CrPc, and this is all due to the Supreme court, which had suggested the Governmnt in some cases to amend the law in this regards.


 7 Replies

Daksh (Student)     18 May 2010


Thanks for such informative post.

Best Regards


Ravikant Soni (LAWYER IN JAIPUR)     29 June 2010

Thanks a lot for your post///

Ravikant Soni (LAWYER IN JAIPUR)     29 June 2010

But i have query....

Can a portion of case diary be exhibited in the court during trial??? and is it admissible in evidence???

plz give citations pertinent to my query.


modassir nasim (lawyer)     13 August 2012

can you give the citation of SC judgement which says that accused is entitled to get statements of CD and not day to day work of IO.

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     15 August 2012

Superintendent and Remembrencer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal Vs Satyen Bhowmick and Others: 1981-CAR-0104-SC: 1981-CRLR-0136-SC:1981-(1)-SCALE--0179-SC: 1981-AIR-0917-SC.CORAM:Syed M Fazal Ali:A.V.Varadarajan.

modassir nasim (lawyer)     16 August 2012

Thanks Assumi.

modassir nasim (lawyer)     17 August 2012

section 242(3) say that a witness can be defered for cross exm....  until some othe witness is not crossed can anyone give case law on it.

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register