Victim Can't Introduce Evidence At Trial Which Is Not Included In Chargesheet By Prosecution: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has held that a victim in a criminal case cannot be permitted to introduce an evidence/material at the stage of trial which was not included in the charge-sheet by the prosecution. [2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 113]While highlighting procedural silence regarding the same and need for safeguarding rights of accused, the Bench of Justice V. Narasingh observed–“Though it is...
The Orissa High Court has held that a victim in a criminal case cannot be permitted to introduce an evidence/material at the stage of trial which was not included in the charge-sheet by the prosecution. [2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 113]
While highlighting procedural silence regarding the same and need for safeguarding rights of accused, the Bench of Justice V. Narasingh observed–
“Though it is trite that technicality ought not to defeat justice, at the same time, this Court cannot lose sight of the rights of an accused sanctified and circumscribed by the procedure as laid down in the Cr.P.C./BNSS.”
The petitioner is the informant/victim (the petitioner herein) in a case under Sections 354 (outrage of modesty)/354-A (sexual harassment)/376(2)(n) (repeated rape)/294 (obscene act)/506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC. Upon submission of charge-sheet against the accused (OP No.2 herein), the victim entered appearance in response to the summons.
In the midst of trial, she filed a petition for introducing a pen-drive stated to contain certain recordings which have direct bearing on the case. However, such application was rejected by the trial Court for which she had filed a criminal revision petition before the High Court. The High Court, last year, disposed of the petition asking the trial Court to reconsider the application. The same came to be rejected again upon reconsideration.
Therefore, filing this fresh criminal revision petition, the petitioner assailed the rejection order. To substantiate her arguments, she placed reliance upon Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal & Ors. (2020) Interestingly, the opposite parties opposed the petition by placing reliance on the same aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
Justice Narasingh highlighted certain observations made in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (supra) which are relevant for this case. The Court therein, inter alia, held–
“When it comes to criminal trials, it is important to keep in mind the general principle that the accused must be supplied all documents that the prosecution seeks to rely upon before commencement of the trial, under the relevant sections of the CrPC…The requirement of such full disclosure is an extremely valuable right and an essential feature of the right to a fair trial as it enables the accused to prepare for the trial before its commencement.”
The Judge acknowledged the peculiar situation in the case where the prosecution does not wish to add anything more, rather the victim has sought permission to adduce additional evidence, accusing perfunctory investigation.
Though procedures are handmaid of justice, the Court said, it cannot permit the rights of accused to be tampered with in the absence of any statutory provision empowering the victim to do so. It also noted that no provision could be cited to support the plea of the victim, in order to enable her to introduce new evidence at the stage of trial.
Resultantly, the criminal revision petition was dismissed.
Case Title: SN v. State of Odisha & Anr.
Case No: CRLREV No. 997 of 2025
Date of Judgment: September 19, 2026
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Mohanty, Advocate
Counsel for the Opposite Parties: Mr. S. Panigrahi, Addl. Standing Counsel; Mrs. S. Biswal, Advocate; Mr. Debasis Sarangi, Advocate & Amicus Curiae
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 113