Inability To Trace Beneficiaries Cannot Defeat Or Postpone Compensation Disbursal: Supreme Court Directs High Court Suo Motu Proceedings Disability Pension | Mere Manifestation Of Disease During Military Service Without Causal Connection Is Not Sufficient For Entitlement: Supreme Court Prevention Of Corruption Act | Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Without Proof Of Demand Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Appointment Contrary To Statutory Requirements And Advertisement Terms Amounts To Fraud On Public: Supreme Court IT Act | Once Settlement Commission Admits Application Under Section 245C, Assessing Officer Loses Jurisdiction To Reopen Assessment Under Section 148: Supreme Court NDPS Act | Prosecution Must Establish Unbroken Chain Of Custody For Samples, Failure To Comply With Section 52-A Renders FSL Report Inadmissible: Supreme Court Section 180 BNSS | Investigating Officers Must Adopt Transparent Practices; DGP Should Consider Making Audio-Video Recording Of Witness Statements Mandatory: Allahabad High Court Rowdy Sheet Cannot Be Opened In A Mechanical Manner Based On Mere Pendency Of Two Criminal Cases: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Surname Protection Under Section 35 Trade Marks Act Not Restricted To Natural Persons': Bombay High Court Allows Corporate Body To Use Family Name Circumstantial Evidence | Prosecution Must Prove Connectivity Between Accused And Crime, Mere 'Last Seen' Theory Insufficient: Calcutta High Court Section 482 BNSS | Criminal Prosecution Against Company Directors Cannot Be Quashed When Investigation Reveals Active Role Beyond Mere Designation: Delhi High Court Cannot Be Permitted To Patch Up Weak Points: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Belated Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Plea Order XXI Rule 90 CPC | Burden To Prove Material Irregularity Or Fraud In Court Auction Sale Lies Upon Judgment Debtor: Kerala High Court Departmental Instructions Not Being Mandatory, Non-Compliance Does Not Vitiate Enquiry If Guilt Is Proved By Other Cogent Evidence: Delhi High Court Doctrine Of Res Gestae | Hearsay Evidence Can Be Admissible If Statement Is Spontaneous And Contemporaneous With The Occurrence: Madras High Court Relatives Cannot Be Roped Into Matrimonial Disputes On The Basis Of Omnibus Allegations: Madhya Pradesh High Court Grants Discharge Victim In Private Complaint Case Entitled To File Appeal Against Acquittal Before Sessions Court U/S 372 CrPC: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 58 BNSS | Detention Beyond 24 Hours Without Magistrate’s Authority Vitiates Remand, Entitles Accused To Bail: Orissa High Court Section 18 Limitation Act | Acknowledgement Of Loan In Promissory Note Extends Period Of Limitation For Entire Debt: Delhi High Court Section 138 NI Act | Existence Of Defence Founded On Disputed Facts Cannot Be Ground To Scuttle Cheque Bounce Prosecution At Inception: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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

Latest Legal News