HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11018 of 2025 Court No. - 85 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State, perused the material available on record. 2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05.08.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Varanasi in Criminal Revision No.53 of 2025 (Prabhu Narain v. State of U.P. and another), whereby the revisional court upheld the order dated 21.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi in Case No.6362 of 2021 ( Rajesh Kumar Singh v. Prabhu Narain), permitting the complainant to bring on record the original cheques along with a documentary list dated 20.05.2024. 3. Briefly stated, the complainant had filed an application on 20.05.2024 seeking permission to bring on record three original cheques: Cheque No.719301 for Rs.1,50,000/-, Cheque No.719302 for Rs.50,000/-, and Cheque No.719303 for Rs.2,50,000/-, all drawn on Kashi Gomti Joint Gramin Bank, Premnagar Branch, Varanasi. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that allowing the original cheques to be produced at the stage of final arguments is contrary to law, and that the delay in filing the said cheques has not been explained by the complainant. He further contends that the courts below failed to consider the provisions of Sections 62 to 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, which govern the admissibility of primary and secondary evidence. According to him, the trial court had earlier proceeded on the basis of photocopies, and the belated introduction of the originals undermines the fairness of the proceedings. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhilasha Singh, Ashutosh Yadav, Shyam Lal Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Prabhu Narain .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And Another .....Respondent(s) 5. However, when queried by the Court as to whether the original cheques were ever produced at the stage of summoning, learned counsel candidly admitted that he was unaware and had received no instructions from the petitioner in that regard. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that in certain districts, including Varanasi, original financial instruments such as cheques are physically inspected by the Magistrate at the preliminary stage and retained for safety and evidentiary purposes, to be brought on record formally at a later stage as per procedural requirements. 7. Upon consideration, this Court finds no material illegality, procedural irregularity, or perversity in the impugned orders. The production of original documents- even at a later stage- cannot ipso facto render the proceedings vitiated, particularly when the documents are relevant and the defence has not been prejudiced. Further, the trial court is vested with the discretion to allow relevant material on record if it serves the cause of justice, provided it does not cause irreparable prejudice to either party. 8. Moreover, the petitioner has not established that the production of the cheques at this stage has caused any miscarriage of justice. The trial court retains the authority to evaluate their evidentiary value in accordance with law, including compliance with the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act during the course of trial. 9. In view of the above, no ground for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out. The present petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. September 16, 2025 SY A227 No. 11018 of 2025 2 (Vinod Diwakar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad