2025:JHHC:16961 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 538 of 2025 1.Manpuran Munda, Aged 38 yrs, S/o Late Soma Munda, R/o Tiko, P.O & P.S-Kuru, District-Lohardaga (Jharkhand) 2.Ibrahim Khan, Aged 49 yrs, S/o Md. Ismail Khan, R/o 30, Near Toriyan School, P.O-Dundigara, P.S-Tupudana, Dist-Ranchi …… Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ……. Opp. Parties --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Amlan Palit, Advocate For the State : None ----------- 03/Dated:25th June, 2025 Heard Mr. Amlan Palit, learned counsel for the petitioners. However, none appears for the State. 2. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners challenging the order dated 02.01.2025 passed by Sri Arbind Kumar No.2, learned A.J.C-XX, Ranchi in NDPS Case No.60 of 2021, Dhurva (T) P.S. Case No.138 of 2021 by which the Certificate under Section 65-B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 has been marked as Exhibit-P-11/P.W-6 (with objection), seized materials sent for examination vide letter no.260 dated 18.08.2021 have been marked as Exhibit-P-12/PW-6 (with objection) and FSL report have been marked as Exhibit-P-13/ PW-6 (with objection) by the learned Court below and the learned Court below has also marked the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate dated 18.08.2021 as Exhibit-P-14 as a public document and thereafter the case was fixed for statement of the petitioners under section 313 of Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Certificate under Section 65-B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, is not the public document whereas the other documents could have been marked as Exhibits. It is submitted that the above documents 2025:JHHC:16961 2 should not have been marked as Exhibits after examination of the petitioners under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C which is not permissible in law and hence the impugned order dated 02.01.2025 may be set aside. 4. None appears for the State. 5. It appears that the petitioners are facing trial in connection with Dhurva (T) P.S. Case No.138 of 2021 dated 17.08.2021 for the offences instituted under section 15/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act and it is alleged that 54 K.G of Doda were recovered from the persons of the petitioners. 6. It appears that the statement of the petitioners was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. However, the learned PP has filed petition under section 311 Cr.P.C for marking above document as the Exhibits. 7. It appears that the above documents have been marked by the I.O. concerned and the petitioners have already been given the opportunity to cross-examine the said witnesses. 8. It appears that the learned Trial Court vide order dated 02.01.2025 had allowed the petition filed by the learned APP under section 311 Cr.P.C and the said documents have been marked as Exhibits (with objection) and most of the documents have been marked ( with objection). 9. It appears that the report of the Magistrate has been marked as P-14 as Public Document by the learned Court below and which was also challenged by the petitioners before the learned Court below. However, the other documents i.e. Certificate issued under Section 65-B(4) has been marked as Exhibit-P11 (with objection), letter No.260 dated 18.01.2021 by which the seized materials were sent for examination has been marked as Exhibit-P- 12 (with objection) and even the FSL report has been marked as Exhibit-P-13 (with objection) 2025:JHHC:16961 3 10. Thus, the learned Court below has taken not of the objection raised on behalf of the petitioners. 11. It further reveals that thereafter the evidence of the prosecution was again fixed on 02.01.2025 for recording the statement of the petitioner under section 313 of Cr.P.C and the petitioners were directed to remain present physically on the said date. 12. Thereafter on 09.01.2025 the petitioners filed petition i.e. statements of accused recorded previously be exhibited and the Court below shall proceed further with the case. 13. It is also evident that the petitioners have not rebutted the document by leading any evidence. The petitioners could have prayed before the learned Court below to allow them to rebut the evidence produced by the prosecution but they have failed to do so. 14. Thus, it is evident that even the petitioners were given opportunity by the learned Court below to rebut the evidence produced by the prosecution marked as Exhibit-P-11 (with objection), P-12 (with objection), P-13 (with objection) and the learned Trial Court had fixed the case for recording the statements of the petitioners but they agreed that their previous statements be treated as their statements rendered under section 313 of Cr.P.C. 15. In this view of the matter, this Court finds that the documents are already marked as Exhibits and therefore, there is no merit in this case. 16. Accordingly, this Cr. Revision No.538 of 2025 is hereby dismissed. 17. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Saket/-