1The revision is by the State, and is directed against an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, made in Criminal M. P. 525 of 1973 in Sessions Case 30 of 1973. The respondents herein, who were the petitioners (accused) before the Sessions Court had, in and by the said Crl. Miscellaneous Petition, prayed that they might be given a copy of the statement recorded on 14-2-1973 from C. W. 2 Viswambharan by the Circle Inspector of Police, Shertallai, during the course of investigation. The objection of the State to the grant of the copy was on the ground that the prosecution did not propose to rely on that statement recorded by Circle Inspector, Shertallai, and therefore the accused were not entitled to it. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, however, allowed the petition and directed the Public Prosecutor to make available the copy of statement to the accused before the trial commenced. It is the correctness of this order that is being challenged in the revision.

2 Sri. K. R. Kurup, the learned State Prosecutor, argues that in terms of the provisions contained In S.173(4) Cr. P. C. the accused is entitled, as a matter of right, only to the copies of those document