Accused must be provided access to all documents necessary for defense to ensure a fair trial.

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner in both these cases is common and the issue projected is also common, except the Special C.C. numbers which would vary. What drives the present petitioner to this Court in the subject petitions is, rejection of an application filed under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C., seeking certain documents for the purpose of examination/cross-examination of the witnesses of the prosecution. The concerned Court rejects the application, the rejection of which has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petitions.

2. The petitioner gets embroiled in a crime registered by the CBI on 26.03.2014. As observed, the issue before this Court is not on the merit of the matter. On 06.04.2023, an application is filed by the petitioner seeking summoning of documents. The CBI files its objections to the said application. The concerned Court rejects the application on the score that the documents are too old to be traced and produced by the prosecution to enable the petitioner to examine or cross- examine the witnesses.

3. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Naik Venkataraman Nagappa for the petitioner and the learned counsel Sri. Prasanna Kumar P, for the respondent.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Sri. Prasanna Kumar would submit that the documents could be given except the CBI manual, which is a confidential document for circulation within the barracks of the CBI. The learned counsel would further contend that the application itself indicates that if the documents are traceable, they should be produced. The learned counsel accepts the fact that if the documents are traceable, they would be produced, except the CBI manual.

5. In the light of the said submission, what remains to be considered is whether the CBI manual must be produced for defence of the petitioner who is facing prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

6. The Apex Court in a suo motu case, in the case of CRIMINAL TRIALS GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES, IN RE v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS reported in(2021) 10 SCC 598, has held that the documents that the accused would seek for his or her defence which are not a part of the charge- sheet, should be provided by the prosecution at the time of investigation into the matter.

7. This Court in the case of DR.SHIVAMURTHY MURUGHA SHARANARU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., Criminal Petition No. 4391 of 2023, Disposed on 11-03-2024, has considered the issue with regard to whether the accused would be entitled to documents at the stage of trial either under Section 91 or under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. and has held as follows:

“…… …… ……

8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. They are a matter of record and they bear complete narration hereinbefore. What has driven the petitioner to this Court in these petitions, is rejection of an application filed under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. by the concerned Court in terms of the impugned order. Therefore, the issue lies in a narrow compass. For a resolution of the issue in the lis, it is necessary to notice of the Cr.P.C., it reads as follows:

“207. Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents.—In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following:—

(i) the police report;

(ii) the first information report recorded under section 154;

(iii) the statements recorded under sub-section (3) of section 161 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses, excluding therefrom any part in reg