JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Shailendra Singh Rajawat, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh along with Sri Alok Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for challenging the impugned order dated 09.09.2022 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.11, Lakhimpur Kheri rejecting the application submitted by the applicant under Sections 231(2), 207 Cr.P.C. in Special Sessions Trial No.164 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.705 of 2018, under Sections 307, 302 I.P.C., Police Station Mohammadi, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the C.D. regarding alleged information given by the first informant to the Investigating Officer, Ex. SA-2 is not admissible in evidence as no certificate as required by Section 65B(4) of Indian Evidence Act has been furnished.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the object behind incorporation of Section 207 Cr.P.C. is to enable the accused to defend himself properly and it is achieved only by supplying of vital documents like police report, statements of witnesses during investigation, confession etc. to the accused so that he may have notice of the charge, he is to meet and cross-examining the witnesses.

5. His next submission is that the idea behind supply of copies to the accused is, thus, to put him to a notice of what he has to meet at the inquiry or trial.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the documents in terms of Sections 207 and 208 Cr.P.C. are supplied to make the accused aware of the materials which are sought to be utilized against him. The object is to enable the accused to defend himself properly.

7. His further submission is that "any other document" mentioned in clause (v) of the Section 207 Cr.P.C. includes electronic document such as C.D./ pen drive etc. which, in the instant case, learned trial court did not supply to the present applicant causing failure of justice to him. The learned Magistrate is duty bound to furnish such document to the applicant under Section 207 Cr.P.C. without any delay.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has concluded his submission by submitting that the learned trial court below has erred in not supplying copy of C.D. without any just cause, which has caused failure of justice to the applicant. The applicant will not be able to defend himself properly and it would, thus, amount to denial of his right to defend properly.

9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. have vehemently the opposed the prayer by submitting that the learned trial court has rightly refused supply of CD. The accused/ applicant has knowledge of this fact and, therefore, it cannot be said that his right to defend himself properly is defeated in any manner by non-supplying of such electronic document.

10. His further submission is that it is a deliberate move on the part of present applicant to delay the proceeding. Therefore, no interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is required at this stage.

11. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it appears that the first information report bearing No.0705 of 2018, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station Mohammadi, District Lakhimpur Kheri came to be lodged against the present applicant. The applicant was named in the aforesaid first information report. Upon conclusion of investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed against the present applicant for the offences under Sections 307 and 302 I.P.C. Thereafter, it appears that an application dated 03.09.2022 came to be moved by the accused/ applicant under Section 231(2) read with Section 207 Cr.P.C. whereby the main prayer of the applicant was to provide him cloned copy of C.D. which, according to statement of Inspecto