JUDGMENT

K. Abraham Mathew, J.—(I) Is an accused entitled to get copy of an electronic record produced in the court by the prosecution as a material object?

(ii) Is the right of an accused to get copies of the documents produced by the prosecution absolute?

The court is called upon to answer these two questions.

2. The petitioner is the accused in a sessions case. He is alleged to have committed the offences under Sections 201 and 302 IPC. The investigating officer produced a ‘tablet’ (computer) , two hard discs of computer, a pen drive and a compact disc, all of which allegedly contain visuals. The petitioner applied for their copies. By the impugned order the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the application. This is challenged.

3. Heard Sri Ravikrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suman Chakravarthy, learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

4. The articles of which copies were applied for were produced by the investigating officer as material objects. The Sessions Judge took the view that if the petition is allowed and copy of the ‘hard disc’ is taken, there is every chance of the hash value being changed and it becomes easy for the accused to allege their contents being