Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Right to Fair Trial Does Not Entitle Accused to 'Unrelied Upon' Documents at Investigation Stage: P&H High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a petition filed by Kalyani Singh against the Central Bureau of Investigation, Chandigarh, challenging the refusal to supply documents deemed 'unrelied upon' by the prosecution. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul held that the accused's entitlement under Section 207 Cr.P.C. is limited to documents "relied upon" by the prosecution.

The petitioner sought quashing of an order dismissing her application under Section 207 Cr.P.C., which demanded access to specific documents listed in a seizure memo but categorized as 'unrelied upon' by the CBI in the charge sheet. She contended that her rights to a fair trial were being compromised by not having access to these documents.

The core issue revolved around whether documents listed as 'unrelied upon' in the CBI's seizure memo should be made accessible to the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the entire seizure memo had been utilized by the CBI, therefore all documents within should be supplied. Conversely, the CBI maintained that only documents explicitly 'relied upon' in their charge sheet were relevant and had been shared accordingly.

Scope of Section 207 Cr.P.C.: Justice Kaul emphasized the role of Section 207 in ensuring a fair trial by mandating the disclosure of all 'relied upon' materials to the accused. The judge referenced the Supreme Court’s directives, which allow the accused to request 'unrelied upon' documents during trial under Section 91 Cr.P.C., but not at the pre-trial stage.

Compliance with Supreme Court Orders: The court noted that the CBI had complied with the Supreme Court's order by providing the petitioner all materials that were 'relied upon' and additionally supplied to the family of the deceased.

Distinction Between 'Relied Upon' and 'Unrelied Upon' Documents: The prosecution clarified that only specific entries from the seizure memo were 'relied upon' and that the documents sought by the petitioner did not fall into this category.

Statutory Restrictions Under Section 172(3) Cr.P.C.: Justice Kaul ruled out the supply of case diaries or police files as they are explicitly protected under the Cr.P.C. to prevent misuse and protect the integrity of ongoing investigations.

Ensuring Fairness Without Compromising Legal Protocols: The court concluded that while the petitioner's desire to access all documents might stem from a place of seeking thoroughness, it does not align with the statutory framework designed to balance fairness with procedural integrity.

Decision: The High Court found no merit in the petition, emphasizing that the petitioner already had access to all documents necessary for a fair defense as mandated by law. The petition was dismissed, underscoring that the right to a fair trial does not automatically extend to the entitlement of all documents at the investigative stage.

Date of Decision: April 25, 2024

Kalyani Singh Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Similar News