High Court Of Delhi
DIRECTOR CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION - Appellant
Versus
RAM JETHMALANI - Respondent
Letters Patent Appeal 94 of 1986
Decided On : 03/16/1988
Held:
that the record of the statements of the witnesses examined by a police officer during the course of investigation and the documents and records procured during the course of such investigation, now in possession of the Director CBI are not, in our opinion, public documents or the result of acts of public funciionaries undertaken during the course of performance of public duties within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Act. Public documents within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Act form an exception to the hearsay rule and their admissibility rests on the ground that the facts contained therein are of public interest. Public documents consist of the acts of public functionaries or transactions which official persons. are required to enter in books or registers. The kind of acts which Section 74 has in view does not include the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code. Any dispute between the respondent and said Mr. Paul is not the subject matter of this writ petition, but the subject matter of libel action pending in courts at London. There is no iota of public interest involved in allowing an individual access to the correspondence or statements if any with the Director CBI. It is merely the interest of an individual citizen who may if advised seek their production in a Court of Law. The Court will consider its relevance to the enquiry or proceeding before it and order its production on merits subject to the claim of privilege, if any.
( 1 ) SHRI Ram Jethmalani, the respondent in this appeal (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) is the plaintiff in a libel action instituted by him in the Queen s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in England, being No. 1983-J No. 6467, against one Shri Swraj Paul of London. The cause of action is alleged to have arisen out of statements made by said Shri Swraj Paul in London to the correspondents of "the Hindustan Times" and "the Daily" which appeared in August 28,1983 issue of the former and September 1, 1983 issue of the latter. Shri Swraj Paul has made a counter-claim arising out of respondent s statement appearing in the August 30, 1983 issue of "indian Express". During the course of the said litigation in England, the respondent was called upon to furnish particulars of certain allegations made by the respondent. According to the respondent, the detailed particulars are available in the statements and documents forming part of the record of an investigation conducted by the Delhi Special Police Establishment in Crime No. 8/77-CIA (1), the first information report in respect of which was registered on October 22, 1977 and being in possession of the appellant-herein. The respondent requested the appellant to allow inspection and/or give certified copies of the statements and documents in the letter dated March 3, 1986 in these words :-
"ram JETHMALANI New Delhi Advocate, Supreme Court Dated 3-3-1986 To The Director C. B. I, SPE, CIA-1 New Delhi. Sir, Re : Crime No. RC. 8/77-CIU (1 ).
AT a later stage during the investigation of the above case at the instance of the Government of India the CBI had asked my advice and for that purpose the files of the investigation were produced before me by the officers of the department. The investigation was, however, dropped sometime in 1981. But on the 27th of August, 1983 a vitrolic attack was made on my character and reputation by Mr. Swraj Paul and the libel statements appeared in the Indian Press. Based on my knowledge and what I had learnt in the course of my professional duties I defended myself and repudiated statements and counter-statements litigation is pending in the High Court of Justice, Queen s Bench Division, being Action 1983-J-6467. While I remember the broad facts the court has ordered some details to be furnished which I can not state from memory. These can only be had from the statements and documents which are available in the files of that investigation. For the purpose of defending my character and reputation I urgently require inspection and/or certified copies of the relevant papers and proceedings. In particular, I require :-
(1) Statement of one Mr. JS Gill dated 21st November 1977, and any further statements thereafter. (2) Statements of one Mr. Nissim Gaon of Noga, Switzerland. (3) Correspondence between the STC i. e. the State Trading Corpn. of India and/or Mr. Nissim Gaon or his company called Compagnie Noga d Importation etd exportation SA. (4) Documents in the shape of draft settlements and telex messages procured during the course of the said investigation. I have a legitimate, substantial and urgent interest in securing these documents. These documents do not constitute official secrets nor do I seek any material covered by Section 123, 124 and 125 of the Indian Evidence Act. I am fighting a litigation against a foreign national in a foreign court and I conceive it to be your duty to render me all possible assistance. It is not out of place to mention that in democracy every citizen has a fundamental right to know subject to exceptions which have no application here. I am willing to pay all the costs and charges. Kindly treat this as urgent. Thanking you Yours faithfully, sd/- Ram Jethmalani Note: All communications may be addressed to me c/o India International Centre, 40 Max Muellar Marg, New Delhi-110003 Phone No. 619431
( 2 ) THE appellant declined to comply with the respondent s request by his letter dated April 10,
SupremeToday
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.