Crl.R.C(MD)No.784 of 2021

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 24.02.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.R.C(MD)No.784 of 2021

and

Crl.M.P(MD)No.9194 of 2021

K.Thangapandiyan

... Petitioner/Petitioner

Vs.

The State represented by,

The Inspector of Police,

C.B.C.I.D – South,

Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.8 of 2020)

... Respondent/Complainant

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with

Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the

entire records pertaining to the order passed by the learned

Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari

District in Crl.M.P.No.529 of 2021 in S.C.No.41 of 2021, dated

27.09.2021 and set aside the same and consequently direct the

aforesaid learned Judge to furnish all the records and materials

appended with the charge sheet in Crime No.8 of 2020 pending on the

file of the respondent.

For Petitioner

: Mr.R.Anand

For Respondent

: Mr.S.Ravi

Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This revision is directed as against the order passed in

Crl.M.P.No.529 of 2021 in S.C.No.41 of 2021, dated 27.09.2021, by

the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Nagercoil,

Kanyakumari District, thereby partly dismissed the petition filed

under Section 207 of Cr.P.C.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and

the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

respondent.

1/5

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Crl.R.C(MD)No.784 of 2021

3. The petitioner is the second accused in S.C.No.41 of 2021 on

the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil. Having

been taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 417 of I.P.C

r/w Sections 376, 354-A, 354-B, 354-C, 354-D, 294(b) and 506(i) of

I.P.C and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000, as

against the first accused and for the offences under Section 201 of

I.P.C r/w Section 417 of I.P.C r/w Sections 376, 354-A, 354-B, 354-

C, 354-D, 294(b) and 506(i) of I.P.C and Section 66E of the

Information Technology Act, 2000, as against the second accused,

namely, the petitioner herein.

4. While pending trial, the petitioner filed a petition under

Section 207 of Cr.P.C for a direction to issue copy of the entire

charge sheet. The trial Court partly allowed the petition and

dismissed the claim of the petitioner insofar as the copies of page

Nos.231 to 246 are the list of other victims with their mobile

number and address, who are not related to this crime; page

Nos.249 to 276 are the Forensic Science Lab Report which contains

obscene images of this victim and other victims; page Nos.335 to 358

are concerned with Crime No.503 of 2020 on the file of the Kottar

Police Station; page Nos.359 & 360 is athatchi concerned with Crime

No.18 of 2020 on the file of the All Women Police Station,

Nagercoil; page Nos.361 to 430 are the proceedings with list of

details of images and videos of the victim in this case and other

victims; page Nos.433 to 454 are the photos, contact details of the

victim in this victim, extraction report, security accounts and page

Nos.455 to 792 are the photos of the victims and other victims.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted

that the respondent did not provide proper paging on the papers

attached with the final report and admittedly, the petitioner was

not provided with all the copies which are going to rely upon by the

prosecution. It causes prejudice and affect the fair trial of the

petitioner. The petitioner is in prison from the date of arrest. In

such circumstances, the Court below directed the petitioner to have

an inspection over the records may not be a fruitful exercise for

him. It is also not practically possible and it could be difficult

task for him to read and get notes on the papers. The law provides

the accused enti