The central legal point established in the judgment is the right of the person affected by a search warrant to obtain copies of the documents related to the search, and the Court's emphasis on the public nature of documents forming the acts or records of official bodies or tribunals.

Judgement

JAGANNADHA DAS, C. J. :- These are three applications made under Art.226 of the Constitution and S.439, Criminal P.C. They arise out of certain searches made in the premises at Cuttack of the petitioners in the three applications by Sri S.W. Abbas, Inspector, Special Police Establishment Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, on 14-6-52. On the said searches it would appear that nothing of an incriminating nature with reference to the purpose of the search was recovered from the premises of the petitioners in O.J.C. 17/52, but some documents were seized from the house of the petitioners 1 and 2 in O.J.C. 33/52. All the petitioners in the three petitions before us applied to the Magistrate who issued the search warrants for certified copies of : (1) the report made by the police or any other person on the basis of which the search warrant was issued; (2) the search warrant; and (3) copies of the order-sheet of the Magisterial record. The Magistrate granted certified copies only of the search warrant and declined to grant certified copies of the other documents asked for. These petitioners, thereupon, came up to this Court with these applications. In all the applications, the petitioners ask for two reliefs : (1) a direction to the Magistrate to grant certified copies of such of the documents applied for whose copies have been refused by him : (2) To set aside the order issuing the search warrant and the searches made thereunder. It may be noted that in O.J.C.33/52, the petitioners also ask for the return of the documents and papers seized at the search. The two questions thus raised on the hearing of these applications are : (1) The right of the petitioners to obtain copies of the documents they have asked for; (2) the legality of the searches and the relief, if any, to be granted.

2. We have heard fairly exhaustive arguments from both sides on these points. With reference to the first point, the petitioners advocate relies entirely on S.548, Criminal P.C. which runs as follows :

"If any person affected by a judgment or order passed by a Criminal Court, desires to have a copy of the Judges charge to the Jury, or of any order or deposition or other part of the record, he shall, on applying for such a copy, be furnished therewith."

His argument is that if as a fact the Magistrate has recorded a formal order on the basis of any report or application made to him by a police officer, he is entitled to copies thereof by virtue of this section. He points out that a Magistrate acting under S.96, Criminal P.C. is statedly a Court. He therefore contends that S.548 applies in terms.

On the other side it is argued that while it may be correct to say that the Magistrate acting under S.96, Criminal P.C. is a Criminal Court, it does not follow that the persons whose premises are searched, are entitled either to a copy of the information or report on which the search warrant is issued or of the order directing the issue of the search warrant. The learned Advocate-General, however, apart from any legal contention, was prepared to furnish the advocate on the other side with a copy of the order passed by the Magistrate for the issue of the search warrant, in order to enable the petitioners advocate to argue the question relating to the legality of the search; but contended that so far as the report of the police officer on which the order is based, the petitioners are not entitled to copies. He has relied on the case in - Anantapadmanabhiah v. Emperor, AIR 1930 Mad 975 and - Queen-Empress v. Arumugham, 20 Mad 189 (FB), to show that the copies of the police reports on which a Magistrate acts, cannot be granted.

On the other side our attention has been drawn to General Rules and Circular Orders (Criminal) of this Court Vol.I, Part IV, Chap.1, Rule 4 which is as follows :

"In criminal cases, parties are entitled to obtain copies, certified or uncertified, of any portion of the record of trial; this rule covers such police papers as may b