IMPORTANT POINT
Denial of a fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as is to the victim and the society. The object of the trial is to mete out justice and to convict the guilty and protect the innocent, the trial should be a search for the truth and not a bout over technicalities and must be conducted under such rules as will protect the innocent and punish the guilty.

ORDER

S.A BOBDE, J.

1. This special leave petition has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 19.7.2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Application under Section 482 No.20215 of 2013 whereby the petitioners’ prayer for documents pertaining to scientific tests made in their application 405/Kha dated 11.6.2013 filed under Section 233 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.PC’) read with Section 91 was rejected.

2. The petitioners are being tried for charges of committing the murder of their daughter Arushi and their domestic helper Hemraj in their house. At the initial stage, the investigation was conducted by the U.P. Police, however, it was later transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CBI’). A closure report was submitted before the Magistrate who disagreed with it and has issued the process to the petitioners for the charge of committing the double murder.

3. The present stage of the trial is that the evidence of the prosecution is closed and the statements of the accused are being recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC. The application in question under Section 311 for examining 7 other left over witnesses was moved at this stage. Alongwith this application, another application under Section 233 Cr.PC read with Section 91 has been moved on 11.6.2013, in respect of the reports of certain tests conducted on 3 persons who at one time were suspected accused and had been in police custody, namely, Krishna, Raj Kumar and Vijay Mandal. By this application, the petitioners’ sought the following reports:

(i) Narco-analysis test reports and CD of Krishna conducted at FSL Bangalore;

(ii) Narco-analysis test reports and CD of Rajkumar conducted at FSL Bangalore;

(iii) Narco-analysis test reports and CD of Vijay Mandal conducted at FSL Bangalore;

(iv) Brain mapping test of Rajkumar conducted at FSL Gandhinagar;

(v) Brain mapping test of Krishna conducted at Bangalore;

(vi) Brain mapping test of Vijay Mandal conducted at Bangalore;

(vii) Lie detector, polygraph test reports of Krishna, Raj Kumar and Vijay Mandal conducted at CFSL New Delhi, FSL Bangalore, FSL Gandhinagar;

(viii) Psychological analysis test reports of Krishna, Raj Kumar and Vijay Mandal conducted at AIIMS, FSL Bangalore, FSL Gandhinagar.

(ix) The Narco-analysis test, brain mapping test, polygraph test and the psychological tests done at AIIMS, CFSL New Delhi and at FSL Gandhinagar of the accused Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Mrs. Nupur Talwar.

x) The written opinion / report and its annexures and other related documents dated 31.7.2008 of the postmortem doctors i.e. Dr. Sunil Dohre and Dr. Naresh Raj regarding inspection and examination of the then murder weapon (Khukhri) sent to them by the CBI.

In addition, applicants also asked for call records, material forming the basis of report prepared by PW.6 and sound simulation test reports.

4. These applications were disposed of by the trial Court by order dated 18.6.2013 allowing them partly.

5. Before the High Court, it was contended by the petitioners that the said reports are essential for the defence since they pertain to those persons who were at one time suspected as being responsible for the offence and contain exculpatory statements favouring the petitioners. According to the petitioners, it is only upon examination of the reports by the Court that the petitioners will be able to put up their plea that the crime, in fact, may have been committed by Krishna, Raj Kumar and Vijay Mandal who were earlier suspected of the offence and had been interrogated. The High Court inter-alia rejected the petitioners’ prayer on the ground that the application is vexatious and intended to only delay the proceedings as was also found by the trial Court.

6. Before us, Shri U.U. Lalit, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the production of the reports pertaining to the abovenamed 3 persons is absolutely essential and relying on Secti