Lachmi Singh and others vs Emperor

Coutts, J.—The ground on which this application for revision was admitted was an allegation that the investigating Police Officer read over the whole of the Police diary for the purpose of refreshing his memory and that when an application for inspection of the diary was made it was refused. On reading the explanation of the Magistrate and the orders which were passed by the Magistrate on the application made at the time, it appears that what occurred was that the investigating officer when in the witness box was asked about a certain date and the names of certain persons and the Court directed him to give the date and the names from the Police diary. This the witness did. The defence thereupon asked for an inspection of the whole diary. This was not allowed; but the Magistrate offered inspection of the date and the names in respect of which the witness had refreshed his memory from the diary. This, however, was refused. I can find nothing in the law which entitles the defence to an inspection of anything more than that portion of the diary from which the witness refreshed his memory and, in my opinion, there was no illegality or irregularity in the procedure of the Magistrate.

I see no reason to interfere and I would dismiss this application.

Das, J.

I agree.