JUDGMENT

B.P. Routray, J.

1. The Petitioner has filed present application praying for a direction to get the entire records collected by the CBI in course of its investigation as disclosed before learned Trial Court.

2. Heard Mr.Shrivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Nayak, learned Special Counsel for the CBI.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that, he being an accused in T.R. Case No.5 of 2018, now pending before the learned Special Judge, CBI-I, Bhubaneswar, is not only entitled to all such documents relied on by the prosecution as per the charge-sheet, but also all such documents collected in course of investigation and may not have been relied on by the prosecution.

4. Section 207 and 208 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Section 230 and 231 of the BNSS) recognizes the right of the accused to get copy of the Police Report and other such documents in a case instituted on the Police Report. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in SUO MOTU WRIT (CRL.) NO.(S) 1/2027 has observed at paragraph-11, as follows:-

“11. The amici pointed out that at the commencement of trial, accused are only furnished with list of documents and statements which the prosecution relies on and are kept in the dark about other material, which the police or the prosecution may have in their possession, which may be exculpatory in nature, or absolve or help the accused. This court is of the opinion that while furnishing the list of statements, documents and material objects under Sections 207/208, Cr.P.C. the Magistrate should also ensure that a list of other materials, (such as statements, or objects/documents seized, but not relied on) should be furnished to the accused. This is to ensure that in case the accused is of the view that such materials are necessary to be produced for a proper and just trial, she or he may seek appropriate orders, under the Cr.P.C. for their production during the trial, in the interests of justice. It is directed accordingly; the draft rules have been accordingly modified. [Rule 4 (i)]"

5. Mr. Nayak, learned Special Counsel, while objecting the prayer of the Petitioner, submits that the documents as relied on and collected/seized by the prosecution have already been served on the Petitioner in terms of Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. and such additional documents as claimed by the Petitioner in the present application have been received by the accused from the prosecution.

6. The Petitioner in paragraph-58 of his petition has mentioned the list of those specific documents, which he needs to be supplied with.

For better appreciation, paragraph-58 & 59 is reproduced below:-

“58. That during the investigation, Petitioner was thoroughly searched multiple times & at various places & the articles were seized from his offices & residential premises & the list of documents & the date in which documents were seized/produced to the CBI by Petitioner are as follows-

I. Note on relevant sections & provisions of Companies Act, 1956 justifying Supratik, Kripalu, JMD & RKJ under same management & hence the same group. Copy of ITAT Order also submitted wherein it was mentioned that Kripalu is under Sudhadevi Group of assesses submitted by the Petitioner on 12.09.2016.

II. The ITRs of Petitioner for F.Ys. 1995-96 to 2015-16.

III. ITRs of Petitioner's wife of F.Ys. 2004-05 to 2015-16.

IV. ITRs of Petitioners HUF of F.Ys.2007-08 to 2015-16.

V. Full details of the movable & immovable properties of the Petitioner, his spouse, & his HUF as furnished to the Election Commission of India at the time of his fil