Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Prem Prakash – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India through the Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
Cr. M.P. No. 305 of 2023
Decided On : 28-02-2023
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 207, 91, 173, 207, 208, 164, 161 – Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Section 4 – Evidence, 1872 – Section 161, 145 – Framing of charge – Quashing the order – Petitioner is an accused in instant case and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of PML Act, 2002 – Case is now pending for framing of charge – Held, Here in present case, police papers have been served which are grounds on which prosecution proposes to frame charge – therefore, pleaded urgency at this stage for furnishing of un-relied document is more of an exaggeration – There appears to be some grain of truth in submission made on behalf of respondent that object is to stall trial – It has also been rightly argued that money laundering is by its very nature a continuing offence, in which on getting trail of proceeds of crime, supplementary prosecution complaints are filed – In these circumstances, considering nebulous nature of crime there cannot be a clear-cut bifurcation between what is un-relied document today, and what will have to be relied upon in future – Practically there can be no such list – Observation by Hon'ble Supreme Court prescient in this context – Court has repeatedly observed that remedies provided for preventing injustice are actually being misused to cause injustice – Facts and circumstance, opposite party is directed to serve list of un-relied documents (if any) to accused, subject to condition that in subsequent prosecution opposite party shall not be precluded from utilizing those documents for ends of justice – There will be no order of stay in framing of charge and learned Court below shall furnish list of un-relied documents to accused before commencement of examination of witnesses – Petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
1. Instant petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 14.12.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Ranchi in ECIR Case No. 04 of 2022 by which the learned Court below has rejected the petition filed under Section 207 read with Section 91 of the Cr. P.C. seeking directions upon the Investigating Agency/State for making disclosure and proving a list of all un-relied documents and statements that are in its possession.
2. Petitioner is an accused in the instant case and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of PML Act, 2002. The case is now pending for framing of charge.
3. The Police Paper has already been furnished.
4. The petition before the learned Court below for furnishing the list of all un-relied documents and statements in the possession of Investigating Agency/State is premised on the guidelines as laid in Criminal Trial Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies, In Re v. State of Andhara Pradesh, (2021) 10 SCC 598 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court issued directions to all High Courts as well as the State Governments and the Union of India to incorporate the Draft Rules, 2021 as part of the rules governing criminal trials, and ensure that the existing rules, notifications, orders and practice directions are suitably modified, and promulgated within 6 months. The relevant draft Rule is under Chapter IV Rule 4 which reads as under: –
4. Supply of documents under sections 173, 207 and 208 Cr. P.C.
Every Accused shall be supplied with statements of witness recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr. P.C. and a list of documents, material objects and exhibits seized during investigation and relied upon by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) in accordance with Sections 207 and 208 Cr. P.C.
Explanation: The list of statements, documents, material objects and exhibits shall specify statements, documents, material objects and exhibits that are not relied upon by the Investigating Officer.
5. The law requiring ‘un-relied documents’ to be furnished, has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022 SCC Online SC 677. The view has been further re-enforced in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 9288 of 2022; P. Ponnusamy v. State of Tamil Nadu wherein it has been held that where some High Courts or Governments of the States/Union Territories have failed to comply with this Court's order and are delayed in adopting the Draft Rules or amending the concerned police/practice manuals, cannot prejudice the right of an accused which has unequivocally been recognized by this Court in its final order of the suo motu proceeding itself.
6. It is further submitted that till the furnishing of the list of un-relied documents, the learned Court below be stayed from framing of charge.
7. Learned ASGI on behalf of E.D. submits that the present petition is intended only to stall and delay the proceedings before the Special Court. In compliance to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the High Court has amended the criminal court rule which has amended the Rules of notification dated 30th May, 2002. The amended Rule 18A read as under: –
8. There is no reference to the un-relied documents in the amended Rules.
9. It is also submitted that at the time of framing of charge it is to be seen that at the time of framing of charge there need to be materials disclosing the ground for offence. Police papers disclose sufficient materials for framing of charge and the prayer for un-relied document is uncalled for. Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Oriss
At the pre-charge stage, the accused is not entitled to the supply of unrelied upon documents, but may request a list of such documents if required.
The prosecution must disclose all documents, including those not relied upon, to ensure the accused's right to a fair trial.
The accused has a constitutional right to inspect all materials collected by the investigation, including non-relied documents, at the charging stage to ensure a fair trial and prevent prejudice, as ....
Accused must be provided access to all documents necessary for defense to ensure a fair trial.
The court upheld that the accused must specify required documents for defense; vague applications do not warrant disclosure of all materials.
The judgment emphasizes mandatory compliance with Supreme Court-established guidelines regarding document disclosure in criminal trials to ensure fair trial rights.
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
