2021 M L D 408
Supplementary statement had got no sanctity in the eye of law---Value of supplementary statement or further statement was not more than a statement recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C.---In the present case, the Trial Court erred in law while exhibiting the supplementary statement purportedly made by complainant---Said supplementary statement of the complainant was nothing more than a statement recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C., which could neither be equated with First Information Report (FIR) nor could be construed as an extension thereof---Such statement could not be used for any purpose other than one provided in S.161, Cr.P.C.---Trial Court while exhibiting the supplementary statement of the complainant had committed an error, therefore, the objection raised by the accused was sustainable, which was wrongly overruled by the trial court-
0 Comments