Heard Shri Avinash M. Angadi, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Shri Ramesh Chigari, the

learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2.

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question

the proceedings in Sessions Case No.5029/2021 pending before

the V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at

Hubballi, registered for the offence punishable under Section

302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The only ground of challenge to the proceedings is,

the investigating agency not furnishing the entire evidence

produced against the petitioner. The petitioner is accused

committing murder on 18.2.2020, of one Momahhed Nadim

S/o.Mohammed Haroon. The Investigating Officer submits the

3

charge sheet in S.C.No.5029/2021 at which point in time

produced a CCTV footage and a report on the said CCTV

footage. The entire report is not made available to the

petitioner.

4.

A truncated version being handed over to the

petitioner, drives the petitioner to file an application under

Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The trial

Court having rejected the said application, drives the petitioner

to this Court in the subject petition. The order of the trial Court,

which is called in question reads as follows:

“On the application of learned counsel for the

accused this matter is taken up on today’s board.

At

this

stage

he

files

the

application

U/sec.227 of Cr.P.C. Learned PP prays time to file

an objection.

At his stage learned counsel for the accused

submits

that

this

court

by

considering

his

application filed U/sec.207 of Cr.P.C. directed the

prosecutions to provide CCTV footage if they have

stored a copy in their computer.

Now the learned PP submits that she got a

information from the I.O. who said that copy of the

CCTV footage had not been stored in their

computer. The CD consisting of CCTV footage is

filed before the court.

4

Learned PP submits that the CCTV footage

which is submitted before this court has been

seized in the presence of the panchas by drawing a

mahazar.

As the CCTV has been submitted along with a

charge sheet, while making a committal of this case

either the accused or his counsel have not objected

for order for committal of this case for non

supplying of the CCTV footage. But at this stage he

is making submission by reporting non furnishing of

CCTV footage.

As the CD cannot be opened unless played

and shown to the panchas and to the concerned I.O

to confirm whether the CCTV footage furnished

before this court is connected to this case seized in

their presence. Thus this court cannot supply the

CCTV footage to the accused. The accused shall

wait till commencement of the trial on that ground

the request of the learned counsel for the accused

on furnishing the CCTV footage at this stage is

hereby rejected.

For objection on application filed U/sec.227 of

Cr.P.C. Call on by 17-12-2021.”

5.

It is not in dispute that the complete report of the

CCTV footage is not furnished to the petitioner. According to the

prosecution, the entire case rests upon the CCTV footage. It is

the primary evidence against the petitioner. It is also the case

of the prosecution that the CCTV footage has captured the

entire act of the petitioner who is alleged of the offence of

murder under Section 302 of the IPC.

5

6.

The issue whether the complete documents i.e.,

electronic record that is marked by the prosecution should be

furnished to the accused or not is no longer res-intera as the

Apex Court in the case of P.Gopalkrishnan alias Dileep vs.

State of Kerala and another, reported in (2020) 9 SCC

161, has held as follows:

28.

As aforesaid, the respondents and

intervenor would contend that the memory

card

is

a

material

object

and

not

a

“document” as such. If the prosecution was to

rely only on recovery of memory card and not

upon its contents, there would be no difficulty

in

acceding

to

the

argument

of

the

respondent/intervenor

that

the

memory

card/pen drive is a material object. In this

regard, we may