Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 28.07.2023

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 2023

and

Crl.M.P.No.11008 of 2023

K.Balakrishnan.

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The Superintendent of Police,

Western Range,

Vigilance and Anti Corruption,

293, M.K.N.Road,

Alandur,

Chennai

(Crime No.6/AAC/2018)

..Respondent

PRAYER : Criminal Revision Case has been filed under section 397

and Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records

relating to the order dated 20.07.2023 made in C.M.P.No.4525 of 2023 in

Spl.C.C.No.2 of 2022 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Namakkal and set aside the same by allowing this Criminal Revision

Case.

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 2023

For Petitioner

:

M/s.N.Manoharan

For Respondent

:

Mr.S.Udayakumar

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the accused being

aggrieved by the dismissal of the petition seeking copy of the documents

under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

2.

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner, referring

about the recent amendment of Criminal Rules of Practice in consonance

with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ (Crl)

No.1 of 2017, submitted that under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., the accused is

entitled to get a copy of the documents relied or not relied by the

prosecution. Whereas, the respondent police, which has referred about

the call detail particulars collected during the course of investigation,

refused to give the copy of the documents. Though it is admitted the

possession of the documents namely the call details, they refused to give

the call details on the ground that it is not a document relied or produced

before the Court.

2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 2023

3.

However, from the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the revision petitioner, this Court learns that 8 witnesses have referred

in their 161 statements about the call details. Though the prosecution has

not relied upon the documents and produced it before the Court, it is very

relevant and necessary for fair trial and necessary for the accused to

know about the content of the call details to defend him.

4.

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted

that for fair trial, copy of the documents collected in the course of

investigation bound to be given to the accused. In this case, the accused

is deprived of the opportunity to look at the documents and the trial

Court has erroneously dismissed the petition stating that this is not the

stage for the Court to conclude that those documents sought in the

petition required for the Court to decide the matter finally.

5.

As far as the documents collected during the course of

investigation, they fall under two categories. One category of documents

are those relied by the prosecution and another category of documents

3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 2023

are those not relied by the prosecution. As far as this High Court is

concerned, Section 207 of Cr.P.C., r/w. Rules of the Criminal Rules of

Practice 25 and 26-A makes it clear that the prosecution has to furnish

the list of documents relied and not relied along with the final report. The

accused is entitled to inspect the documents not relied by the prosecution.

6.

Copy of all the documents relied by the prosecution should

be given to the accused subject to Section 173(5) of Cr.P.C. In this case,

as rightly pointed out by the trial Court that the copy of the documents

sought is not the one produced before the Court. It is in possession of the

prosecution agency. Since the prosecution is in possession of the said

document, the trial Court is not in a position to permit the

petitioner/accused even to inspect the doc