NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dated 14.02.2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’) passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act), CBI, Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’) in CC No. 277/2019 titled CBI v. M/s Premier Vinyl Flooring & Ors..

2. By the Impugned Order, the learned Trial Court was pleased to observe that once the respondent herein has filed the list of un-relied documents, the Court cannot get into another inquiry by assuming that the respondent herein may have not furnished the complete list of un-

CRL.M.C. 954/2022 Page 2 of 16 relied documents. The Court further held that there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, ‘CrPC’) which requires the Court to consider if the list of un-relied documents filed by the respondent herein is complete or not. The Court observed as under:

“35. If CBI has not filed any relevant document with charge-sheet or did not mention in the list of unrelied documents, obviously the consequence would be against it.

But all these facts can be well appreciated at the appropriate judicial stage in the trial. As noted above, the inquiry proceedings before charge has been going on for the last 20 years.

This court when will consider the case of CBI for the purpose of charge, accused would be within their right to raise that CBI had intentionally withheld certain documents, which could have proved different facts or defence of accused persons. At this stage of the inquiry when this court cannot express anything on the facts and merits of the matter, it would be far too adventurous and delaying to go into the inquiry as to whether certain other documents were seized by the CBI or not and why same were not mentioned in the list of unrelied documents. Investigating officer may be in its wisdom returned or did not keep any such documents. But this court would consider the consequence of the same at appropriate judicial stage.

36. I feel pained to note repeatedly in each of order of this court, that this matter is already 20 years or more old and has not reached to the stage of charge. Therefore, going into an inquiry which is otherwise not recognized under the law to ascertain if the list of unrelied documents of CBI is complete or not, to my mind would rather defeat the judicial process.

No doubt, it is to be ensured that documents which have tendency to prove the innocence of the accused, must come on the judicial record.

CRL.M.C. 954/2022 Page 3 of 16 But if for any reason same either not collected or withheld by the investigating agency, prosecution would suffer for the same.

However, this fact can be well examined only at the stage of charge and not at this stage.

37. It has already come in the reply of CBI that it has already supplied some of the unrelied documents.

Certain unrelied documents like 56 bills, documents pertaining to Indian Embassy in Turkmenistan has already been submitted in the court in compliance to the order dated 20.11.2013. Similarly, certain other documents of correspondence with Indian Embassy in Turkmenistan was also filed in the court as per the order dated 18.7.2019. Similarly, 14 swift messages, 25 goods arrival registers (unrelied documents) were also filed in compliance to order dated 27.7.2019. Moreover, letter dated 20.7.98 and documents furnished along with the remand application dated 22.12.99 already part of judicial record.

38. It is matter of record that while hearing the arguments on these applications, CBI was given another opportunity by order dated 5.2.2022 to furnish any other documents, if any, lying on the file/case diary, apart from the documents lying in the Malkhana of the CBI.

However, despite having given such oppor