IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
Nikhil Vinayak Narule and Anr. – Applicants
Versus
State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Umred, Nagpur – Respondent
Criminal Revision Application No.102 Of 2024
Decided On : 03-03-2025
(A) Indian Evidence Act - Section 145 - Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 173(5), 173(6), and 207 - Right to fair trial - Accused entitled to transcript of Audio/Video Recorded Statement of victim to confront witness - Denial of transcript affects fairness of trial - Prosecution must provide clone copy of electronic records relied upon. (Paras 3, 5, 20, 22)
(B) Fair trial - The right to a fair trial includes the opportunity to confront witnesses with prior statements, ensuring the accused can effectively present their defense. (Paras 18, 20)
Facts of the case:
The accused challenged the trial court's order denying them a transcript of the victim's statement recorded in a Pen-Drive, arguing it infringed their right to a fair trial.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the accused must be provided with the transcript to ensure a fair trial and effective defense.
Issues: Whether the accused are entitled to a transcript of the Audio/Video Recorded Statement of the victim.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the accused's right to confront witnesses necessitates access to prior statements, and the prosecution must provide a clone copy of electronic records for a fair trial.
Result: The Criminal Revision Application is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel Shri Atul Rawlani for applicants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri M.J.Khan for the State.
2. By this revision, the challenge has been raised to order dated 27.6.2024 passed below Exh.113 by learned Extra Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge, POCSO Court), Nagpur in Special Criminal (Child) Case No.482/2022 whereby the application moved by the applicants (the accused) for supplying a clone copy of the data available in Pen-Drive submitted by the Investigating Officer having statement of the victim.
3. Learned counsel for the accused submitted the clone copy (transcript of the statement recorded by the Investigating Officer in the nature of Audio/Video Recording) of statement be provided to the accused to allow them by giving a fair opportunity to confront the said statement to the witness in view of Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is contended that though the prosecution supplied him copy of the statement in a Pen-Drive, the Audio/Video Recording itself shows that the police officer who recorded the said statement has also reduced it into the writing and the accused has right to have a copy of the same in the interests of a fair trial. The fair trial is the fundamental right of the accused. It is further submitted that the reasoning given by the trial court is not reasonable and is affecting the right of a fair trial of the present accused. A full transcript of the Audio has to be provided to the accused and if it is not provided, it would seriously affect impartiality and fairness of the trial proceedings.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State strongly opposed the said application on the ground that the accused Nos.1, 4, and 5 moved an application before learned Judge below vide Exh.113 to supply the transcript copy/typed copy of videography statement filed by the prosecution in Pen-Drive. The copy of the statement which is recorded in the nature Audio/Video is already copied in the Pen-Driver and supplied to the accused and, therefore, the accused are having a document in the nature of Pen-Drive to contradict the witness and, therefore, the application is rightly rejected and no interference is called for.
5. The question raised is, whether the accused persons are entitled to have a transcript of Audio/Video Recorded Statement of the victim and Audio/Video Recorded Statement is a statement made by a person wherein both their voice (audio) and visual appearance (video) are captured simultaneously essentially treating that including both the spoken words and the body language of the speaker often used in legal proceeding to document, witness testimonies or confession with greater accuracy and transparency.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by both the parties and having perused the record, it would be relevant to refer Sections 173(5) and (6) and Section 207 of the Indian Penal Code, which are reproduced as under:
“173(5). When such report is in respect of a case to which section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report -
(a) all documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation;
(b) the statements recorded under section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.
173(6). If the police officer is of opinion that any part of any such statement is not relevant to the subject-matter of the proceeding or that its disclosure to the accused is not essential in the interests of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest, he shall indicate that part of the statement and append a note requesting the Magistrate to exclude that part from the copies to be granted to the accused and stating his reasons for making such request.
207. In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the ac
AI
Accused have the right to access a transcript of the victim's Audio/Video Recorded Statement to ensure a fair trial and effective defense.
Important Point:a) A criminal trial cannot be allowed to assume the character of fishing and roving enquiryb) it was the duty of the prosecution to ensure fair trial for both the prosecution and the ....
Accused cannot obtain copies of statements recorded under Section 164, CrPC, before filing of charge-sheet, despite them being public documents under Section 74 of the Evidence Act.
The court established that victim privacy must be protected even while ensuring the accused's right to a fair trial, allowing only inspection of sensitive evidence.
In criminal trials, documents relied upon by the prosecution should generally be supplied to the accused, but exceptions exist in cases involving privacy or identity issues, where the accused may be ....
The right to privacy must bow down to compelling public interest, and certification under Section 65-B of the Act is needed when the recording is to be produced in trial as evidence.
The accused's right to a fair trial, the obligation of the prosecution to make fair disclosure, and the accused's entitlement to relevant documents collected during the investigation were central leg....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.