TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same with equal force is applicable to the accused and if there is nothing extraordinary, in usual course, the copies of necessary documents must be provided to the accused persons of a crime, even at the stage of investigation and so much material should be provided by the investigating agency to the accused which may at least reflect the necessary evidence and material appearing against accused resulting in his arrest and confinement. This Court is of the considered view that the Central Bureau of Investigation should have provided a copy of post trap memo of date 31.1.2024 to the applicant - Application allowed. - Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J. For the Applicant : Pranjal Krishna For the Opposite Party : Anurag Kumar Singh ORDER HON'BLE MOHD. FAIZ ALAM KHAN, J. 1. Heard Shri Nandit Srivastava, learned Senior advocate assisted by Shri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I. and perused the record. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant against the impugned order dated 15.02.2024 passed by the Trial court/ Special Court with the prayer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of manpower to various departments. It is also alleged that proceedings under Section 7A has been initiated by EPFO against his firm and Shri Gyanendra Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, EPFO, Lucknow and Shri Puneet, Inspector, EPFO , Lucknow has demanded Rs. 12 lacs for not imposing/ leaving tax and the said amount has been demanded by the Shri Gyanendra Kumar Singh Punit Singh (applicants) through consultant Manish Singh. The complaint is shown to have been discreetly verified and the F.I.R. of the case was registered and subsequent to registration of the F.I.R. after completing the formalities of pre trap proceedings, the trap was laid on 30.01.2024 and the consultant Manish Kumar was trapped/ arrested and the Assistant Commissioner, EPFO, Shri Gyanendra Kumar was also arrested and was produced before the Court on 31.01.2024 and the instant applicant is also shown to have been arrested on 31.01.2024. 8. Thus, what is reflected from the record is that all the three persons against whom allegations were levelled by the complainant have been arrested. This Court is not in a position to appreciate the stand taken by the C.B.I. before the court below, which is evident from the reply fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... today. This direction applies, specifically in respect of Draft Rules 1-3. The appropriate forms and guidelines shall be brought into force, and all agencies instructed accordingly, within six months from today. 11. Hon ble Supreme Court in three Judges Bench judgment of P. Ponnusamy Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 923, while acknowledging the guidelines issued in above mentioned In RE: To Issue Certain Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies in Criminal Trials (supra), observed as under:- 7. The amici curiae had pointed out that before the commencement of the trial, the accused only receives a list of documents and statements relied upon by the prosecution but is kept in the dark on other material in the possession of the prosecution, even if it has exculpatory value. On this, the court unequivocally held: 11. .This Court is of the opinion that while furnishing the list of statements, documents and material objects under Sections 207/208 CrPC, the Magistrate should also ensure that a list of other materials, (such as statements, or objects/documents seized, but not relied on) should be furnished to the accused. This is to ensure that in case t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tituted an inalienable attribute bute of the process of a fair trial which Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees to every accused. We would like to reproduce the following portion of the said judgment discussing this aspect (VK. Sasikala case (V.K Sasikala v State, (2012) 9 SCC 771 (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 1010), SCC P 788, para 21) 21. 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 en 20 would no longer be one of compliance or non-compliance with the provisions of Section 207 CrPC and would travel beyond the confines of the strict language of the provisions of CrPC and touch upon the larger doctrine of a free and fair trial that has been painstakingly built up by the courts on a purposive interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution. It is not the stage of making of the request, the efflux of time that has occurred or the prior conduct of the accused that is material. What is of significance is if in a given situation the accused comes to the court contending that some papers forwarded to the court by the investigating agency have not been exhibited by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Additionally, by virtue of Section 391 of the CrPC. the appellate court, if it deems necessary, may take further evidence (or direct it be taken by a magistrate or court of sessions) upon recording reasoning. This safeguards the right of the accused in a situation where concern has been raised regarding evidence or material in possession of the prosecution, that had not been furnished. but was material to the trial and disposal of the case. 17. As stated earlier, the requirement of disclosure elaborated on in Manoj, not only was premised on the formulation of draft rules, but normatively premised on the ratio of the three-judge bench decision in Manu Sharma (supra). In these circumstances, the proper and suitable interpretation of the disclosure requirement in Manoj (supra) would be that: (a) It applies at the trial stage, after the charges are framed. (b) The court is required to give one opportunity of disclosure, and the accused may choose to avail of the facility at that stage. (c) In case documents are sought, the trial court should exercise its discretion, having regard to the rule of relevance in the context of the accused's right of defence If the document or material i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
