Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Vrinda Grover, Mr. Soutik Banerjee, Ms. Devika Tulsiani
For the Respondents: Mr. Amit Prasad, Ms. Ruchika Prasad, Ms. Kavya Agarwal, Ms. Chanya Jaitly

Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) pertains to the power of the police to summon documents or other articles. Specifically, it authorizes the police to issue a notice to any person requiring the production of any document or thing that may be relevant to an investigation or trial, provided the police have reasonable grounds to believe that such a document or article is in the possession, custody, or control of that person (!) .

In the context of the provided legal document, which deals with the investigation of custodial violence and the transfer of investigation to an independent agency, Section 91 CrPC is relevant because it underpins the authority of the police to seek evidence and documents necessary for a fair and thorough investigation (!) . The court's emphasis on ensuring an impartial investigation and the need for transparency aligns with the principles that Section 91 enshrines, as it facilitates the collection of evidence that may be pivotal to establishing facts and accountability.

Furthermore, the court’s decision to transfer the investigation to an independent agency underscores the importance of conducting a credible investigation, which may include the utilization of powers granted under Section 91 to summon relevant documents, records, or evidence from various sources, including police records, CCTV footage, duty rosters, logbooks, or other pertinent material (!) .

In summary, Section 91 CrPC grants the police the authority to require the production of evidence that is crucial for a fair investigation, and the court’s directives in this case to ensure transparency and impartiality are consistent with the powers and objectives of this section.