The right of accused persons to obtain copies of the record of the trial, including depositions and documents, is not absolute and can be restricted in certain circumstances, such as when the publication of evidence would be prejudicial to the safety of the State.

( 1 ) AN enquiry under Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure is pending against the opposite parties before a Presidency Magistrate under various sections of the Official Secrets Act, On an application on behalf of the prosecution under Section 14 of the Official Secrets Act the learned Magistrate made an order on April 28, 1969, excluding the public during the trial.

( 2 ) ON November 19, 1969, opposite party No. 12 filed an application before the Magistrate for "copies of deposition of the witnesses" and opposite party No. 16 filed an application for 'copies and for permission to inspect the records and take necessary notes". The learned Magistrate considered these applications and passed an order on November 22, 1969, allowing them under Section 548 of the Code "to take copies of depositions and other documents on payment of proper fees". The State has thereafter obtained this Rule against this order of the learned Magistrate.

( 3 ) MR. Roy appearing on behalf of the State first contends that the commitment enquiry has just started and only a few witnesses have been examined or, in other words, no trial has yet commenced and no "judgment" has as yet been "passed" by the learned Magistrate and so, Section 548 of the Code is not attracted at this stage.

( 4 ) SECTION 548 of the Code reads as follows:"if any person affected by a judgment or order passed by a Criminal Court desires to have a copy of the Judge's charge to the Jury or of any order or deposition or other part of the record, he shall on applying for such copy, be furnished therewith. "mr. Roy submits that Section 548 of the Code is attracted only after the trial is over and a "judgment" has been passed by the trial Court. We have quoted the Section and it will be seen that a person has been given the right to get copies only when he has been affected by a "judgment passed by a Criminal Court. " There is no doubt that an accused may be affected by a judgment passed by a Criminal Court. But the words used are "passed by a Criminal Court" and not "passed or to be passed by a criminal court"; nor can it be said that the word "passed" here was intended to mean not only passed but also to be passed by a criminal court. If that was the intention of the legislature, the legislature would have made it clear. We cannot for the purpose of interpretation of a statute add words to the statute to find out its real meaning. On the face of it, therefore, it seems that Section 548 of the Code is attracted only after a trial is over and a judgment had been passed. But Section 548 of the Code speaks of not only judgment but "order passed by a criminal court". True, there is no judgment as yet in this case, but there is no doubt that during the course of the proceeding several "orders" have been passed by the learned Magistrate and it cannot be denied that an accused is affected by an order passed by a Magistrate in the course of the commitment proceeding. "order" here does not mean the final order or the order which finally dis poses of the case because that would be "judgment" within the meaning of Section 366 of the Code. Since Section 548 of the Code uses both the words "judgment or order", "order" must be interpreted to mean some thing different from the final order or judgment and since several orders have been passed by the learned Magistrate in the course of the proceeding before him and since these orders must have affected the accused persons. Section 548 of the Code would be attracted even during the course of this committal proceeding. Furthermore, an accused has the constitutional right to defend himself and to defend himself properly. It may just be necessary for his proper defence that he should get copies of the order-sheet, depositions of witnesses and all documents marked exhibits in the proceeding. Unless the accused gets these copies, which are all part of the record of the case, the accused may be prejudiced in his trial. Thus, even ap