Statements under S.164 Cr.P.C. are public documents accessible to entitled parties upon payment.

1. We had by our order dated 3.4.2012 directed the petition to be listed before us for deciding the issue as to whether an accused or a victim of an offence was entitled to a copy of the statement of the victim recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C. by a judicial Magistrate, if an application is duly made and the court fee which is required for obtaining such a copy of such statement is paid by the desirous person.

2. It so happened that while hearing this petition, we are informed that it was in practise in the State of U.P. in various courts that they refuse to supply the certified copies of 164 Cr.P.C. statement of a witness or the victim of an offence even if the party is willing to obtain a copy of such a document and is ready to pay the cost legally admissible for issuing the same.

3. We were in fact not ready to accept the contention. We were, prima facie, of the view that a statement under S.164, Cr.P.C. was required to be recorded by a judicial Magistrate under that particular section in due discharge of his judicial functions and, as such, the act of recording the statement was a judicial act which was performed by a public servant while discharging his judicial functions and in our considered view that particular document is relevant under S.35 of the Evidence Act as also under S.72 of the Indian Evidence Act and as such, assumes the character of being a public document."

4. We further went on to pass the following order: -
"We require the District and Sessions Judge, Bareilly also to furnish a report as to under what circumstances the copy, which was applied for of the above noted document, was refused to be supplied to the present petitioner. In the meantime, we wish that the petitioner had filed the rejected copy of the application for copy on the present record."

5. In the light of the above directions issued to the District and Session Judge, Bareilly on 29.3.2012, the Registrar General of the Court had received a communication from the District and Session Judge, Bareilly vide his memo No. 541 / XV dated 3rd April, 2012 in which the learned Judge was referring to R.263 of the General Rules (Civil) of the Court to inform us that there was prohibition on supplying the statement of a witness recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. or any other part of evidence collected by the Investigating Officer prior to reaching the stage of filing the charge - sheet and as such the accused can never ask for a copy or any part of the case dairy at any stage of the investigation. What the learned Judge further attempted to impress upon us was that the above Rule was created on the basis of a judicial pronouncement in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 5840 of 2005, Mukesh and others Vs. State of U.P.

6. During the course of present hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner produced before us yet another judgment rendered by this Court long back in 1932 which is reported in A.I.R. 1932 Allahabad 327, Bashiruddin and another Versus Emperor in which the Court was deciding that the statement under S.164, Cr.P.C. was a public record and that was bound to be supplied to the accused on admissible cost if he had applied for it. In fact for issuing the above direction, the learned Judge supplied the following reasons: -
"Statements recorded under S. 164, Criminal P.C. are public documents, being the acts of a Judicial Officer done under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code , and the public servant in whose custody those documents were, was bound to issue copies thereof. An accused is undoubtedly entitled to inspect statements of prosecution witnesses recorded under S. 164, Criminal