Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
T. P. Mukherji
SUPDT. AND REMEMBRANCER OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, WEST BENGAL - Appellant
Versus
VIMLA DASSI - Respondent
Criminal Revn. 235 Of 1968
Decided On : APRIL 05, 1968
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Section 173 (4) - Right of accused to copies of documents - Whether available in cases where cognizance taken on complaint but investigation conducted under Chapter XIV - Interpretation of Sections 251a, 252, 173, 190 (1) (a), 200, 204 (1a), 204 (1b) and 4 (h) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Fact of the Case:
Six revision cases involving the issue of whether accused persons are entitled to copies of documents under Section 173 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in cases where cognizance is taken on a complaint but an investigation has been conducted under Chapter XIV of the CrPC. In some cases, trials were held in presidency magistrate courts, while others were held in special courts created under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act 1949.
Finding of the Court:
1. Section 173 (4) of the CrPC confers a right on accused persons to obtain copies of documents referred to in the section in cases arising out of police reports submitted after police investigation. 2. The right to copies under Section 173 (4) is not limited to cases where cognizance is taken on a police report but also extends to cases where cognizance is taken on a complaint but an investigation has been conducted under Chapter XIV of the CrPC. 3. The duty to furnish copies of documents under Section 173 (4) lies with the prosecution, and the trial court must direct the prosecution to comply with the provisions of the subsection if copies have not been provided. 4. The intention of the legislature in amending Section 173 in 1955 was to provide accused persons with the benefits of simplified procedure for exercising their rights under Section 145 of the Evidence Act and Section 162 of the CrPC, as well as prior knowledge of the evidence that would be used against them at trial.
Issues: 1. Whether the accused has a right to copies of documents under Section 173 (4) of the CrPC in cases where cognizance is taken on a complaint but an investigation has been conducted under Chapter XIV of the CrPC. 2. Whether the duty to furnish copies of documents under Section 173 (4) lies with the prosecution or the court.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The right to copies under Section 173 (4) is not limited to cases where cognizance is taken on a police report because: - The amendment of Section 173 in 1955 was intended to confer benefits on accused persons in cases arising out of police reports, including the right to copies of documents. - The scheme of the CrPC is that when the prosecution is in possession of evidence collected by an investigation under the Code, those materials should be made available to the defense before the trial commences. - Denying the right to copies in cases where cognizance is taken on a complaint but an investigation has been conducted under Chapter XIV would frustrate the intention of the legislature and deny the accused a fair trial. 2. The duty to furnish copies of documents under Section 173 (4) lies with the prosecution because: - The prosecution benefits from the results of the investigation. - The CrPC does not require the court to satisfy itself that copies have been served on the accused in cases where cognizance is taken on a complaint.
Final Decision: 1. The rules issued in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 119, 120, 126, and 191 of 1968 are discharged. 2. The rules in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 132 and 235 of 1968 are made absolute. 3. The orders of the learned judges in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 132 and 235 of 1968 are set aside, and the learned judges are directed to give suitable directions to the prosecution for the supply of copies referred to in Section 173 to the accused persons in these cases.
( 1 ) THESE six Rules are taken up for bearing together as the same questions of law and fact are involved in all of them. The Rules in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 119, 120, 126 and 191 of 1968 arise out of trials being held in the courts of Presidency Magistrates at Calcutta while the Rules in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 132 and 235 of 1968 arise out of trials in the courts of Special Judges created under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act 1949. The trials in the courts of the presidency magistrates are in respect of offences under the Indian Penal Code and also an offence under the Imports and Exports (Control) Article 1947.
( 2 ) ALL tht cases were initiated on complaints although all of them were preceded by police investigations held under Chapter XIV of tht Code of Criminal Procedure In the cases pending before the magistrates, permission was taken by the investigating officer from the magistrates concerned under Section155 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to investigate inasmuch as offences under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act are non-cognizable. After investigations in those cases no reports under Section 173 of the Code were, however, filed and cognizance was taken on complaints filed bv persons authorised by the Central Government under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act.
( 3 ) IN one of the cases pending before the Special Courts (Criminal Revision Case No. 235 of 1968) the report of the investigating officer was treated as a complaint and cognizance was taken thereon, while in the other (Criminal Revision Case No. 132 of 1968) the public prosecutor of the district filed a petition made by an inspector of police who obviously held the investigation in the case and that petition made by the police inspector but filed by the public prosecutor was treated as a complaint.
( 4 ) IN all the trials before the Presidents magistrates as well as before the special judges the procedure prescribed in Section 252 and the following sections ot the Code of Criminal Procedure are being followed. The accused in all these cases applied for conies of documents referred to in Section 173 of the Code to be furnished to them The learned presidency magistrates directed the prosecution to furnish the copies as praved for. It is against these orders directing copies to be furnished that the Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal, moved this Court and obtained the relevant Rules The special iudges refused the prayer for the granting of copies and the accused persons concerned moved this Court and obtained the relevant Rules against those orders.
( 5 ) THE common question that is posed in all these Rules is whether when cognizance is taken on the basis of a complaint obviously under Section 190 (1) (a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in a case which has been preceded by an investigation under Chanter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure but wherein no report under Section 173 of the Code was filed, the accused should be entitled to the benefit of Section 173 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the shape of copies of documents referred to in the section being made available to him.
( 6 ) THE learned advocates appearing for the State in all these cases have argued that when cognizance was taken on a complaint and the procedure for trial of the case is according to the provisions of Section 252 and the successive sections of the Code, law does not enjoin on the prosecution the duty of furnishing copies of any document to the accused It is contended that the liability to serve copies of documents arise under the procedure contemplated under Section 251a of the Code which relates to trials of cases instituted on Police reports As the Criminal Procedure Code has divided the cases for the purpose of a trial into two classes -- one started on a police report and th othei started otherwise than on a police report -- and as separate procedure
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
