DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short – 'the Cr.P.C.') for quashing of impugned order dated 05.05.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI Haryana at Panchkula in FIR No. RC1(S)/2015 SCU.V/SCII/CBI/New Delhi dated 07.01.2015 under Sections 120-B/326/417/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station SCII/CBI New Delhi. A further prayer has also been made that the proceedings before the trial Court be stayed during pendency of this petition.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that the petitioner filed an application under Section 91 read with Section 207 Cr.P.C. before the trial Court, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 05.05.2018 (Annexure P-1) which is subject matter of challenge in the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the documents collected by the investigating agency during the course of investigation have not been supplied to the accused/petitioner only on the ground that those documents have not been relied upon by the prosecution, whereas the same is violative of right of fair trial. Learned counsel also submits that in view of ratio of law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in number of judgments, an accused is entitled to be given fair opportunity, which is necessary for fair trial and same cannot be ignored. Learned counsel further submits that the right of accused with regard to disclosure of documents may be limited but it is codified and is the very foundation of a fair investigation and trial. Learned counsel also submits that certain rights of the accused flow both from the codified law as well as from equitable concepts of the constitutional jurisdiction and in failure thereof a substantial variation to such procedure would frustrate the very basis of a fair trial.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contends that the Investigating Officer of the case is having in possession the statements of 128 persons recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., whereas, the statements of only six persons have been placed on record. Around 20 persons were examined during course of investigation, who stated that they were castrated but they did not support the case of the prosecution as they refused to undergo medical examination. The statement of 122 witnesses examined during course of investigation have been concealed from the cognizance of the Court and copies of those statements were not supplied either to the Court or to the accused persons, whereas those statements are relevant and are fundamental basis of evidence which are necessary for the accused persons to know.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the provisions of Section 207 read with Section 91 Cr.P.C., the principle of liberal interpretation is required for fair disclosure of evidence collected during investigation which is fundamental right of the accused for fair trial and also the guarantee of fair trial granted by the Constitution of India.

6. At the end, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire evidence collected by the investigating agency during course of investigation is necessary and essential for fair trial. It is required for the accused to prepare his defence. The statements of witnesses are important for the fair trial and also crucial by considering the entire controversy and by exercising the powers under Section 207 read with Section 91 Cr.P.C. as well as free and fair disclosure being the essence of fair trial is a fundamental guarantee which has been denied by passing the impugned order. Learned counsel also submits that as per ratio of judgment passed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in case Union of India Vs. Prafulla Kumar Samal and another 1979 (3) Supreme Court Cases 4, in case two views are possible, the benefit should go to the accused. It has also been held by Hon'ble the Apex Court