TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iso empowers the court to direct the accused to inspect the documents which in the opinion of the court are not practicable to furnish to the accused, because of the voluminous record thereof. In V.K. SASIKALA VERSUS STATE REP. BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE [ 2012 (9) TMI 1133 - SUPREME COURT ], the accused in her application before the trial Court furnished specific details of the documents which were unmarked and un-exhibited which were in the custody of the court required by her with specific reference to the seizure list prepared by the investigating agency while filing a petition to supply the copies of the said documents. But, in the present case, the petitioner without specifying any documents which he required was contending in a vague manner and seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to supply all the documents and statements collected by it during the course of investigation, though the 2nd respondent was contending that they had supplied all the documents available with them. The petition being vague without any details of the documents sought by the petitioner, which were seized by the predicate offence agency or the 2nd respondent, is rightly rejected by the learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned Special Judge failed to follow the law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in Re: To Issue Certain Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies In Criminal Trials Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others . He could not have dismissed the petition on the ground that the guidelines were not yet framed by the concerned High Court. The learned Judge ought not to have dismissed the petition on the ground that the petition filed was a delaying tactic. After the initial arguments of framing of charges by the prosecution on 08.01.2020, due to the pandemic all the courts were working virtually, hence, the framing of charges could not have taken place and the said delay could not be attributed to the petitioner. On a perusal of the counter, specifically with respect to para-7, it was abundantly clear that the prosecution relied on various sources other than the predicate agency hence, there might be some other documents which were un-relied by the prosecution. The learned Judge erred in coming to a conclusion that all the material relied by the prosecution was filed along with the final report, whereas the 2nd respondent had not stated anything in their counter regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the PML Act against A1 to A5, A7 to A13. On appearance of the accused before the Court on 12.07.2019, the documents relied on by the Enforcement Directorate were furnished to the petitioner as contemplated under Section 207 Cr.P.C. The Special Public Prosecutor advanced his arguments on hearing on charges on 08.01.2021 as per the order of the learned Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad in Crl.M.P.No.2031 of 2021. The order would further disclose that when the court insisted the learned counsel to advance their arguments on charges, the A1 filed an application under Section 207 Cr.P.C. to furnish the unrelied documents vide Crl.M.P. No.1976 of 2021 and the said petition was dismissed on 08.12.2021 and subsequently, the petitioner-A2 filed an application under Section 207 Cr.P.C. on 15.12.2021. The learned Judge observed that the application was filed only to protract the proceedings to the maximum extent possible. On merits he observed that the respondent did not make any search nor seized any document from any of the accused and the search and seizure were made by CBI in the predicate offence and as the respondent filed all the documents relied by them and no guidelines were fra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub- section (6) of section 173; (iv) the confessions and statements, if any, recorded under section 164; (v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub- section (5) of section 173: Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused: Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in Court. 9. Section 208 Cr.P.C. is pertaining to supply of copies of statements and documents to accused in cases instituted otherwise than on a police report. The said Section is not relevant to the facts of the case at present. 10. On perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and unexhibited documents of the case that are being demanded by the accused had been forwarded to the Court under Section 173 (5) but are not being relied upon by the prosecution. Though the prosecution has tried to cast some cloud on the issue as to whether the unmarked and unexhibited documents are a part of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., it is not denied by the prosecution that the said unmarked and unexhibited documents are presently in the custody of the Court. Besides, the accused in her application before the learned Trial court(IA 711/2012) had furnished specific details of the said documents and had correlated the same with reference to specific seizure lists prepared by the investigating agency. In such circumstances, it can be safely assumed that what has been happened in the present case is that along with the report of investigation a large number of documents have been forwarded to the Court out of which the prosecution has relied only on a part thereof leaving the remainder unmarked and unexhibited. 15. In a recent pronouncement in Siddharth Vashisht @ Manu Sharma V. State (NCT of Delhi) ((2010) 6 SCC 1) to which one of us (Sathasivam, J) was a party ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allegedly incriminating documents can be better explained by reference to some other documents which are in the court s custody, an opportunity must be given to the accused to satisfy herself in this regard. It is not for the prosecution or for the Court to comprehend the prejudice that is likely to be caused to the accused. The perception of prejudice is for the accused to develop and if the same is founded on a reasonable basis it is the duty of the Court as well as the prosecution to ensure that the accused should not be made to labour under any such perception and the same must be put to rest at the earliest. Such a view, according to us, is an inalienable attribute of the process of a fair trial that Article 21 guarantees to every accused. 17. The issue that has emerged before us is, therefore, somewhat larger than what has been projected by the State and what has been dealt with by the High Court. The question arising would no longer be one of compliance or noncompliance with the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C. and would travel beyond the confines of the strict language of the provisions of the Cr.P.C. and touch upon the larger doctrine of a free and fair trial that ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecessary to be produced for a proper and just trial, she or he may seek appropriate orders, under the Cr.P.C. for their production during the trial, in the interests of justice. It is directed accordingly; the draft rules have been accordingly modified. [Rule 4(i)]. 12. The Draft Criminal Rules on Practice, 2021, Rule 4(i) was modified as under: 4. SUPPLY OF DOCUMENTS UNDER SECTIONS 173, 207 AND 208 CR.PC: i. Every Accused shall be supplied with statements of witness recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C and a list of documents, material objects and exhibits seized during investigation and relied upon by the Investigating Officer (I.O) in accordance with Sections 207 and 208, Cr.P. C. Explanation: The list of statements, documents, material objects and exhibits shall specify statements, documents, material objects and exhibits that are not relied upon by the Investigating Officer. 13. Placing reliance upon these guidelines issued by the Hon ble Apex Court, the petitioner-A2 filed the present petition to direct the respondent-prosecution to supply all the documents and statements collected by it during the course of investigation. He had not specified as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure laid down in the Manual of the CBI. 14. Learned Standing Counsel further contended that the CBI manual provides the procedure for inspection of documents kept in the Malkhana but no such provision was available under PML Act. Section 21 of the PML Act deals with retention of records, but no records were seized by the Enforcement Directorate. Section 21 of the PML Act is also extracted to avoid any confusion in this regard. 21. Retention of records.- (1) Where any records have been seized under section 17 or section 18 or frozen under sub-section (1A) off section 17 and the Investigating Officer or any other officer authorised by the Director in this behalf has reason to believe that any of such records are required to be retained for any inquiry under this Act, such records may if seized, be retained or if frozen, may continue to remain frozen, for a period of not exceeding one hundred and eighty days from the day on which such records were seized or frozen, as the case may be. (2) The person, from whom records were seized or frozen, shall be entitled to obtain copies of records. (3) On the expiry of the period specified under sub-section (1), the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
