Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Section 207 Cr.P.C. Mandates Only the Supply of Documents Relied Upon by the Prosecution – Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Limitation on Access to 'Unrelied Upon' Documents

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified the scope of document disclosure under Section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). The court dismissed a petition seeking access to documents listed as 'unrelied upon' by the prosecution in a criminal case involving the petitioner, Kalyani Singh.

The central legal issue in this case revolved around the interpretation of Section 207 Cr.P.C., which concerns the provision of documents to the accused. The petitioner contended that all documents seized, including those not relied upon by the prosecution, should be made available to her to ensure a fair trial.

The petitioner, Kalyani Singh, challenged an order from the Special Judge, CBI, Chandigarh, which denied her application for access to certain documents described in the seizure memo but marked as 'unrelied upon' by the prosecution. She argued that these documents were essential for her defense and contended that their withholding violated her right to a fair trial.

Scope of Section 207 Cr.P.C.: Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul noted that Section 207 serves to inform the accused of evidence that will be used against them, preventing surprises during the trial. However, it does not extend to documents that the prosecution does not intend to rely on.

Supreme Court Precedents: Referencing the Supreme Court's directive in "In Re: To Issue Certain Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies And Deficiencies In Criminal Trials," the High Court observed that while transparency is critical, it does not necessitate the provision of all seized documents at the pre-trial stage.

Right to Access Documents: The court pointed out that documents deemed 'unrelied upon' by the prosecution could be requested under Section 91 Cr.P.C. during the trial, but not at the stage of framing charges.

Protection of Investigation Integrity: The judgment emphasized the importance of safeguarding sensitive information, such as the identities of informants and the integrity of the ongoing investigation, which justified restrictions on the disclosure of certain documents.

Decision: The High Court dismissed the petition, affirming the lower court’s decision that the prosecution need only supply documents it relies upon. Documents classified as 'unrelied upon' remain undisclosed at the pre-trial stage.

Date of Decision: April 25, 2024

Kalyani Singh Versus Central Bureau of Investigation, Chandigarh

Latest Legal News