ORDER

% 25.01.2024

1. The present petition is filed challenging the orders dated 15.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act)(CBI) (hereafter ‘impugned orders’).

2. The learned Special Judge, by impugned orders, has directed petitioner to supply the statements of unrelied Thirty Two witnesses and also to furnish the revised list of unrelied documents.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said direction is contrary to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of P. Ponnusamy v. The State of Tamil Nadu : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1543.

4. He submits that the prosecution is only required to give the list of unrelied documents. The said documents are supplied to the accused on an appropriate application being made, and if the Court is satisfied that the said documents are relevant.

5. He submits that the prosecution had already supplied the list of unrelied witnesses and it was for the respondent to make out a case for supply of those documents.

6. Issue notice.

7. The learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice and submits that the respondent would be satisfied if the inspection of the statements of unrelied witnesses is provided.

8. He submits that in the absence of any knowledge of the contents of the statement, the accused is not in a position to file an appropriate application.

9. Prima facie, the grievance raised by the learned counsel for the respondent appears to be genuine.

10. Since the question of law is raised in the petition, no reply is required, however the parties are at liberty to file a short note of submissions, not exceeding three pages along with the list of authorities relied upon in support of their submissions.

11. List for further consideration on 26.04.2024. AMIT MAHAJAN, J JANUARY 25, 2024 ‘KDK’