The accused is entitled to document disclosure under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. for a fair trial, including materials not necessarily relied upon by prosecution.

ORDER :

M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.

Petitioner is common in both these cases. He is accused No.1 in special case Nos.27 and 28 of 2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 376(c), 376(2)(n), 376(AB), 376(3), 366, 366(A), 323, 114 r/w 34 of the IPC, Sections 5(L), 6, 7 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012 (‘POCSO Act’ for short), Sections 3(f) and 7 of the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act , 1988 (‘the 1988 Act’ for short) and Sections 75 and 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘the 2015 Act’ for short). What has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petitions is an order passed by the concerned Court declining to accede to an application filed under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. in terms of its order dated 20-04-2023.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts in brief, germane are as follows:-

The complainant in the subject crime is an employee of Sri Jagadguru Murugharajendra Bruhanmutt, Chitradurga (‘the Mutt’ for short). The complainant is said to be working as a Cooking Assistant in the Dasoha Hall of the Mutt. She is said to have married and from the wedlock two children are born and it is the further case of the complainant that due to frequent quarrel the complainant is said to have severed ties with her husband pursuant to the alleged incidents that have happened in the Mutt. Several other allegations are made in the complaint of what has happened in the girls’ hostel of the Mutt. The allegation, as averred in the petition, is that during the year 2019 the elder daughter of the complainant was studying in 7th standard and the younger daughter in the 5th standard. They are alleged to have been sexually abused by accused No.1, the Pontiff of the Mutt - the petitioner. It is further alleged that the girl children were sent to the private room of the Pontiff with the connivance of the Warden, accused No.2. Several allegations are made which are not germane to be considered at this juncture. The investigation was complete and charge sheet was laid against the petitioner and accused No.2, the Warden. It is the case of the petitioner that CW-66 is the Investigating Officer who had formed a final report against the petitioner and accused No.2 as could be found in Column No.17 of the charge sheet. It is the case of the petitioner that the Investigating Officer had heavily relied upon the material collected while investigating Crime No.484 of 2022 and no document was appended to the charge sheet except mentioning the aforesaid facts. It is the case of the petitioner that the Investigating Officer has deliberately not made the relevant material upon which the charge sheet is filed as documents appended to the charge sheet.

3. In the aforesaid facts the petitioner files an application under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the prosecution to produce or furnish complete records in Crime No.484 of 2022 and the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. It is the case of the petitioner that all the facts obtaining in Crime No.484 of 2022 and Crime No.445 of 2022 are intertwined and, therefore, those documents would be imperative for his defence. The concerned Court, in terms of its order dated 20-04-2023, declines the application on the ground that the Investigating Officer is yet to file the charge sheet and therefore, the application cannot be allowed. It is this order that has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Heard Sri.C.V.Nagesh, learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner, Sri.Jagadeesha.B.N, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing