The court emphasized the necessity and desirability of the documents for the inquiry and highlighted the discretion of the court in exercising its powers.

Judgment

RAJU, J.

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) THE above appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge of the Delhi High Court dated 4-1-1999 in Criminal Revision No. 123/97, repelling a challenge made to the order passed by the Special Judge, Delhi, on 26-11-1996 in Sessions Case No. OC-224/94, rejecting an application made by the appellant under Section 91, Cr. P. C. for summoning and production of documents enumerated in the application. Those documents were stated to be required to show that the appellant had not shown any favour to persons commonly known as Jain Brothers or to any person for that matter in the course of discharge of his duties while working as DIG, CBI, and that present action against the appellant is vitiated on account of mala fides on the part of the CBI, who is alleged to bear animus against the appellant.

( 3 ) THE said application was hotly contested by the CBI and the Special Judge held that none of the documents sought to be summoned would help to show that the case of the prosecution was improbable or unworthy of even a trial and that summoning them at that stage of the proceedings was meant by the appellant to delay the proceedings initiated by the CBI. The appellant, as noticed supra, also unsuccessfully knocked at the doors of the High Court before approaching this Court. The learned Judge in the High Court elaborately considered the governing legal principles as laid down by the Courts and the factual details produced and observed that though the language of Section 91, Cr. P. C. is very wide, not only the powers have to be exercised judiciously but such jurisdiction to order for production of a thing or document would come into play on the Court being satisfied that it is "necessary or desirable," that it should be produced as being relevant for the inquiry. Therefore, the learned Judge proceeded to advert in detail to the reasons assigned by the Special Judge and concurred with them that those documents are not of such a nature which would show that the case of the prosecution is improbable and unworthy of trial and that the said attempt of the appellant was merely to delay the proceedings, leaving liberty to summon them at the relevant time. The exercise of discretion by the Trial Judge in disallowing the claim was considered to be neither unjust nor unreasonable or improper and the order was held to be neither illegal nor vitiated by any infirmity, so as to call for interference, in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant reiterated the stand taken before the Courts below with great vehemence by inviting our attention to the decision of this Court reported in Satish Mehra v. Delhi Administration, (1996) 9 SCC 766, laying emphasis on the fact that the very learned Judge in the High Court has taken a different view in such matters, in the decision reported in Ashok Kaushik v. State, (1999) 49 DRJ 202. Mr. Altaf Ahmed, the learned ASG for the respondents, not only contended that the decisions relied upon for the appellants would not justify the claim of the appellant in this case, at this stage, but also invited, extensively our attention to the exercise undertaken by the Courts below to find out the relevance, desirability and necessity of those documents as well as the need for issuing any such directions as claimed at that stage and consequently there was no justification whatsoever, to intervene by an interference at the present stage of the proceedings.

( 5 ) SECTION 227 in Chapter XVIII, pertaining to trial before a Court of Session, pursuant to a committal order and Section 239 in Chapter XIX relating to trial of warrant cases by Magistrates, of the Code stipulates the circumstances and stage at which there could be a discharge of the person accused, and that stage is a stage of consideration, anterior in point of time to framing charges. It is envisaged therein that upon consideration of the record of th