PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) BY above captioned petitions under Section 482 of the Code of criminal Procedure petitioner is seeking recall of 2 orders of even date i. e. 6. 8. 2005 passed by the Court of Special Judge, NDPS, Delhi.

( 2 ) ON 20. 11. 1987 Drug Enforcement Administration Officials, USA seized narcotic drugs from 2 Indians and informed Narcotics Control Bureau about the same. On 22. 6. 1988 NCB, Delhi filed a complaint against 6 persons including petitioner under Section 21, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

( 3 ) FACTS pertaining to Crl. M. C. 4872/2005 are that on 18. 5. 2005 an application was moved by the petitioner seeking permission to inspect the file brought by Devender Dutt, PW-6. The file was sought for cross-examining said witness.

( 4 ) VIDE impugned order dated 6. 8. 05, application of the petitioner was dismissed by the Special Judge

( 5 ) IT is not in dispute that file in question relates to investigation conducted by the official of the respondent NCB in connection with commission of the alleged offence.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner had raised a two-fold contention in support of his petition.

(i) That right to information is a fundamental right under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India save and except confidential documents as mentioned under Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act. That since respondent ncb has not claimed any such protection under Section 123, petitioner is entitled to inspect the file. (ii) That learned Special Judge failed to appreciate that file was required by the petitioner to prepare his defence. Therefore, denial of the respondent NCB to provide access to the said file to the petitioner is a violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

( 7 ) PER contra, learned counsel for the respondent contended that petitioner cannot claim inspection of investigation of file as a matter of right.

( 8 ) RESPONDENT draws attention of this court to Section 172 of the code of Criminal Procedure which reads as under :-

?172. Diary of proceeding in investigation ? (1) Every police officer making an investigation under this Chapter shall day by day enter his proceeding in the investigation in a diary, setting forth the time at which the information reached him, the time at which he began and closed his investigation, the place or places visited by him, and a statement of the circumstances ascertained through his investigation. (2) Any Criminal Court may send fro the police diaries of a case under inquiry or trial in such Court, and may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case, but to aid it in such inquiry or trial. (3) Neither the accused nor his agents shall be entitled to call for such diaries, nor shall he or they be entitled to see them merely because they are referred to by the Court; but, if they are used by the policed officer who made them to refresh his memory, or if the Court uses them for the purpose of contradicting such police officer, the provisions of section 161 or section 145, as the case may be, of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), shall apply.

( 9 ) A plain reading of Section 172 (3) makes it obvious that an accused is not entitled to see record of investigation maintained by a police officer except for the limited purposes of Section 145 and Section 161 of the indian Evidence Act,1872.

( 10 ) THE key question that arises for consideration in present case is whether provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure can be availed of for investigating, inquiring or trying of offences under any law other than Indian penal Code.

( 11 ) TO answer this question, it is necessary to note Section 4 and 5 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

?4. Trial of offences under the Indian Penal Code and other laws ? (1) All offences under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) shall be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the provisions hereinafter contained. (2) All o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document