Special CBI Judge Manu Rai Sethi allowed the agency's plea to lead 97 additional prosecution witnesses and also 44 documents which the agency claimed could not be filed earlier on account of "inadvertence".
Allowing CBI's plea, the judge said, "In considered opinion of this Court, charge sheet cannot be deemed to be a document which cannot later on be supplemented.
"In case there is any lapse on part of Investigating Officer or even of the Investigating Agency in not placing on record complete list of witnesses and documents at the initial stage, obviously, prosecution should not be made to suffer for the same..."
CBI had in its original charge sheet against him annexed a list of 141 documents and 160 witnesses.
During arguments, Abhay's counsel Harish Sharma vehemently opposed CBI's plea saying the charge sheet in the matter was filed in December, 2009 while the FIR was registered in 2006 and it took nearly four years for CBI to realise that due to inadvertence some documents and witnesses remained to be brought on record.