Karnataka High Court
Sri. K R Sheshuprasad vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation on 10 February, 2026
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:8065
CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4875 OF 2023
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4878 OF 2023
IN CRL.P No. 4875/2023
BETWEEN:
SRI. K.R. SHESHUPRASAD
S/O LATE K. RAJARAM IYENGAR,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
THE THEN BRANCH MANAGER,
PANJAB NATIONAL BANK,
TUMAKUR DISTRICT
RESIDING AT NO. 101, 4TH CROSS,
Digitally signed 5TH MAIN, R.P.C LAYOUT,
by SANJEEVINI BENGALURU - 560 104.
J KARISHETTY
Location: High ...PETITIONER
Court of
Karnataka (BY SRI. NAIK VENKATRAMAN NAGAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH,
BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:8065
CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023
HC-KAR
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO 1.
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.05.2023, PASSED IN
SPL.C.C.NO.76/2016, BY THE HONBLE XLVII ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR CBI
CASES (CCH-48), BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-A).
IN CRL.P NO. 4878/2023
BETWEEN:
SRI. K.R. SHESHUPRASAD
S/O LATE K. RAJARAM IYENGAR,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
THE THEN BRANCH MANAGER,
PANJAB NATIONAL BANK,
TUMAKUR DISTRICT
RESIDING AT NO. 101, 4TH CROSS,
5TH MAIN, R.P.C LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 104.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAIK VENKATRAMAN NAGAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH,
BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:8065
CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023
HC-KAR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P.,ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO
1. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.05.2023, IN
SPL.C.C.NO.73/2016, PASSED BY THE HONBLE XLVII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
SPECIAL JUDGE FOR CBI CASES (CCH-48), BENGALURU
(ANNEXURE-A).
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
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 -4- NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR 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 -5- NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR 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 -6- NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR ORS.1, 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 Section 207 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 regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub-section (6) of section 173;
(iv) the confessions and statements, if any, recorded under section 164;
(v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub-section (5) of section 173:1
Criminal Petition No. 4391 of 2023, Disposed on 11-03-2024 -7- NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause
(iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused:
Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in Court."
Section 207 Cr.P.C. deals with supply of copies of police report and other documents to the accused. The section contains 5 postulates of what should be furnished. Interpretation of Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. and its purport qua the postulates need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter, as the Apex Court in the case of CRIMINAL TRIALS GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES, IN RE v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [(2021) 10 SCC 598] interpreting the aforesaid provision of law has in a suo motu proceeding under Article 32 of the Constitution of India noticed common deficiencies which occur in the course of criminal trial and certain practices adopted by trial Courts in criminal proceedings. What was the cause for such anomaly was considered therein and a direction was issued to adopt uniform practice. Paragraph 11 of the said judgment reads as follows:
".... .... ....
11. The Amici Curiae 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 CrPC, 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 -8- NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR 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 CrPC ["91. Summons to produce document or other thing.--(1) Whenever any court or any officer in charge of a police station considers that the production of any document or other thing is necessary or desirable for the purposes of any investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code by or before such Court or officer, such Court may issue a summons, or such officer a written order, to the person in whose possession or power such document or thing is believed to be, requiring him to attend and produce it, or to produce it, at the time and place stated in the summons or order.(2) Any person required under this section merely to produce a document or other thing shall be deemed to have complied with the requisition if he causes such document or thing to be produced instead of attending personally to produce the same.(3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed--(a) to affect Sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), or the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 (13 of 1891) or(b) to apply to a letter, postcard, telegram or other document or any parcel or thing in the custody of the postal or telegraph authority."] 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)]"
The Apex Court accepts the contention of Amicus Curiae therein that in a trial the accused are only furnished with the list of documents and statements which the prosecution relies on and the accused cannot be kept in dark about other materials which the Police or the prosecution may have in their possession. These documents may help the accused in getting themselves absolved of the crime. The Apex Court opined that while furnishing list of statements, documents and material objects under Sections 207 and 208 Cr.P.C, the Magistrate should ensure that a list of other materials, even though not relied on, should be furnished to the accused, as they would be imperative for a fair trial. Reference being made to a three judge bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MANOJ AND OTHERS V. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [2022 SCC OnLine SC 677], wherein it is held as follows:
-9-NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR "184. In Manu Sharma, in the context of policy diaries, this court noted that "the purpose and the object seems to be quite clear that there should be fairness in investigation, transparency and a record should be maintained to ensure a proper investigation". This object is rendered entirely meaningless if the police fail to maintain the police diary accurately. Failure to meticulously note down the steps taken during investigation, and the resulting lack of transparency, undermines the accused's right to fair investigation; it is up to the trial court that must take an active role in scrutinizing the record extensively, rather than accept the prosecution side willingly, so as to bare such hidden or concealed actions taken during the course of investigation.
185. In the present case, the trial court ought to have inquired more deeply into the role of DW-1, given that by her own deposition she had admitted to analyzing call detail records and involvement in Neha's arrest - all of which had been suppressed by the prosecution side, for reasons best known to them. In this context, a reading of Section 91 and 243 CrPC as done in Manu Sharma, is important to refer to:
"217. ..Section 91 empowers the court to summon production of any document or thing which the court considers necessary or desirable for the purposes of any investigation, inquiry, trial or another proceeding under the provisions of the Code. Where Section 91 read with Section 243 says that if the accused is called upon to enter his defence and produce his evidence there he has also been given the right to apply to the court for issuance of process for compelling the attendance of any witness for the purpose of examination, cross-examination or the production of any document or other thing for which the court has to pass a reasoned order."
186. The court went on to elaborate on the due process protection afforded to the accused, and its effect on fair disclosure responsibilities of the public prosecutor, as follows:
"218. The liberty of an accused cannot be interfered with except under due process of law. The expression "due process of law" shall deem to include fairness in trial. The court (sic Code) gives a right to the accused to receive all
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR documents and statements as well as to move an application for production of any record or witness in support of his case. This constitutional mandate and statutory rights given to the accused place an implied obligation upon the prosecution (prosecution and the Prosecutor) to make fair disclosure. The concept of fair disclosure would take in its ambit furnishing of a document which the prosecution relies upon whether filed in court or not. That document should essentially be furnished to the accused and even in the cases where during investigation a document is bona fide obtained by the investigating agency and in the opinion of the Prosecutor is relevant and would help in arriving at the truth, that document should also be disclosed to the accused.
219. The role and obligation of the Prosecutor particularly in relation to disclosure cannot be equated under our law to that prevalent under the English system as aforereferred to. But at the same time, the demand for a fair trial cannot be ignored. It may be of different consequences where a document which has been obtained suspiciously, fraudulently or by causing undue advantage to the accused during investigation such document could be denied in the discretion of the Prosecutor to the accused whether the prosecution relies or not upon such documents, however in other cases the obligation to disclose would be more certain. As already noticed the provisions of Section 207 have a material bearing on this subject and make an interesting reading. This provision not only require or mandate that the court without delay and free of cost should furnish to the accused copies of the police report, first information report, statements, confessional statements of the persons recorded under Section 161 whom the prosecution wishes to examine as witnesses, of course, excluding any part of a statement or document as contemplated under Section 173(6) of the Code, any other document or relevant extract thereof which has been submitted to the Magistrate by the police under sub-section (5) of Section 173. In contradistinction to the provisions of Section 173, where the legislature has used the expression "documents on which the prosecution relies" are not used under Section 207 of the Code. Therefore, the provisions of Section 207 of the Code will have to be given liberal and relevant meaning so as to achieve its object. Not only this, the documents
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR submitted to the Magistrate along with the report under Section 173(5) would deem to include the documents which have to be sent to the Magistrate during the course of investigation as per the requirement of Section 170(2) of the Code.
220. The right of the accused with regard to disclosure of documents is a limited right but is codified and is the very foundation of a fair investigation and trial. On such matters, the accused cannot claim an indefeasible legal right to claim every document of the police file or even the portions which are permitted to be excluded from the documents annexed to the report under Section 173(2) as per orders of the court. But certain rights of the accused flow both from the codified law as well as from equitable concepts of the constitutional jurisdiction, as substantial variation to such procedure would frustrate the very basis of a fair trial. To claim documents within the purview of scope of Sections 207, 243 read with the provisions of Section 173 in its entirety and power of the court under Section 91 of the Code to summon documents signifies and provides precepts which will govern the right of the accused to claim copies of the statement and documents which the prosecution has collected during investigation and upon which they rely.
221. It will be difficult for the Court to say that the accused has no right to claim copies of the documents or request the Court for production of a document which is part of the general diary subject to satisfying the basic ingredients of law stated therein. A document which has been obtained bona fide and has bearing on the case of the prosecution and in the opinion of the Public Prosecutor, the same should be disclosed to the accused in the interest of justice and fair investigation and trial should be furnished to the accused. Then that document should be disclosed to the accused giving him chance of fair defence, particularly when non- production or disclosure of such a document would affect administration of criminal justice and the defence of the accused prejudicially.
222. The concept of disclosure and duties of the Prosecutor under the English system cannot, in our opinion, be made applicable to the Indian criminal jurisprudence stricto sensu at this stage. However, we are of the considered view that the doctrine of disclosure would have to be given somewhat expanded
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR application. As far as the present case is concerned, we have already noticed that no prejudice had been caused to the right of the accused to fair trial and non- furnishing of the copy of one of the ballistic reports had not hampered the ends of justice. Some shadow of doubt upon veracity of the document had also been created by the prosecution and the prosecution opted not to rely upon this document. In these circumstances, the right of the accused to disclosure has not received any setback in the facts and circumstances of the case. The accused even did not raise this issue seriously before the trial court.
(emphasis supplied)
187. In this manner, the public prosecutor, and then the trial court's scrutiny, both play an essential role in safeguarding the accused's right to fair investigation, when faced with the might of the state's police machinery.
188. This view was endorsed in a recent three judge decision of this court in Criminal trials guidelines regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies, in re v. State of Andhra Pradesh. This court has highlighted the inadequacy mentioned above, which would impede a fair trial, and inter alia, required the framing of rules by all states and High Courts, in this regard, compelling disclosure of a list containing mention of all materials seized and taken in, during investigation-to the accused. The relevant draft guideline, approved by this court, for adoption by all states is as follows:
"4. SUPPLY OF DOCUMENTS UNDER SECTIONS 173, 207 AND 208 CR.PC Every Accused shall be supplied with statements of witness recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.PC and a list of documents, material objects and exhibits seized during investigation and relied upon by the Investigating Officer (I.O) in accordance with Sections 207 and 208, Cr. PC.
Explanation : The list of statements, documents, material objects and exhibits shall specify statements, documents, material objects and exhibits that are not relied upon by the Investigating Officer."
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR
189. In view of the above discussion, this court holds that the prosecution, in the interests of fairness, should as a matter of rule, in all criminal trials, comply with the above rule, and furnish the list of statements, documents, material objects and exhibits which are not relied upon by the investigating officer. The presiding officers of courts in criminal trials shall ensure compliance with such rules."
(Emphasis supplied)
9. On a conjoint reading of Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. and the aforesaid judgments rendered by the Apex Court (supra), what would unmistakably emerge is, the statements recorded by the Police under Section 161 or 164 of the Cr.P.C. before registration of the crime should be furnished to the accused. Sub-section (5) of Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. imposes a duty on the Police to submit a charge sheet against the accused persons along with all material documents or relevant extracts on which they propose to rely on. On the bedrock of the statute and the opinion of the Apex Court, the case at hand requires to be considered.
10. The petitioner files application under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. for a direction to the prosecution to provide complete records in Crime No.484 of 2022. This is rejected by the concerned Court in terms of the order dated 20-04- 2023. The reason for rejection is germane to be noticed. The order reads as follows:
"ORDERS ON APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTION 207 OF CRPC SEPARATELY FILED BY ACCUSED NOS. 1 AND 2 The counsel for accused No. 1 and counsel for accused No.2 filed separate applications under Section 207 of Cr.P.C seeking for a direction to the prosecution to provide the records in Cr.No.484/2022 registered by complainant's police and to furnish Section 164 statements of all the witnesses to the accused.
2. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has filed separate objections to the said applications. Since both
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR the applications are similar in nature seeking same relief both the applications are considered together.
3. Heard the arguments. Perused the records.
4. From the materials placed before the court following point arises for my consideration:
Whether the accused Nos. 1 and 2 have made out that they are entitled for the entire records in Cr.No.484/2022 registered by complainant's police and Section 164 of Cr.P.C statements of all the witnesses as sought for under Section 207 CRPC?
5. My findings to the above point is in the Negative for the following:
REASONS
6. The present application has been filed under Section 207 of Cr.P.C which is reads as below:
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 regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub-section (6) of section 173:
(iv) the confessions and statements, if any, recorded under section 164;
(v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub-section (5) of section 173:
Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (ii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused:
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in Court.
7. The learned counsel for accused Nos. 1 and 2 drew the attention of this court to the note found at the end of column No. 17 of the charge sheet. The Investigating Officer has noted at column No.17, as below:
" ಈ ೇ ನ ಾ ಮತು ಇತ ೇಯವರ ರುದ ತ ದುಗ ಾ ಾಂತರ
ೕ "ಾ#ೆಯ $.ನಂ. 484/2022 ಕಲಂ. 366(ಎ), 384, 420.
120(() ಐ *ೕ+ಾ, ೇಸು .ಾಖಲ0 ತ12ೆಯ 3ರುತ.ೆ.
$.ನಂ..484/2022 ರ ಪ ಕರಣವ6 ಈ ೇ ನ ಅಂದ ೆ $.ನಂ..445/2022 ರ counterblast ಪ ಕರಣ8ೆಂದು ಕಂಡುಬಂ ರುತ.ೆ. ಪ ಯುಕ $.ನಂ.484/2022 ರ ಪ ಕರಣದ ತ12ೆ;ಂದ <ೊರಪಟ? ಫ +ಾಂಶವನುB ಪ*Cೕ , ನಂತರ ಈ ೇ ನ 3 DಾE ತ12ೆ ಪFಣ ೊG ಾನ, Hಾ, ಾಲಯ ೆI ಅಂJಮ ವರ ಯನುB ಸ 3ಸKಾಗುವ6ದು".
8. Based on the said note of the Investigating Officer, the learned counsel for accused Nos. 1 and 2 contended that. the entire records in Cr.No.484/2022 is with the Investigating Officer and they are entitled for copies of the same as per Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C. From reading Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C it is seen that, the Magistrate is bound to furnish any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under Section 173(5) of Cr.PC. In this case, the prosecution has not produced any records pertaining to Cr.No.484/2022 which has not been furnished to the accused.
9. Section 173(5) of Cr.P.C states that, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the final report, all the documents or relevant extract thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to Magistrate during investigation and the statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses. Therefore, it is seen that, the documents or the records pertaining to Cr.No.484/2022 are not enclosed with the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer in this case.
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR
10. From the bare reading of the above note referred to by the counsel for accused, it is seen that according to the Investigating Officer Cr.No.484/2022 is still under Investigation and after completion of investigation in the said case, the Investigating Officer in this case would submit further report in that regard under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, according to the said note the investigation is still under progress in Cr.No.484/2022.
Moreover, it is pertinent to note that, nowhere the accused have stated the description of the documents which the prosecution has failed to furnish as per Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C. As regards the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. the said statement, if any, recorded shall be in the custody of the concerned Magistrate and the Investigating Officer is duty bound not to disclose the contents of the said statement to anybody. In fact, as per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court nobody including the accused would be entitled for copy of statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C in Cr.No.484/2022 unless cognizance is taken by the court in the case in which the said statement was recorded. Therefore, as regards the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C the accused have failed to make out that, Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C applies and they are entitled for copies thereof.
11. As regards Cr.No.484/2022 as stated above the applications are very vague. Nowhere in the application, the accused have stated the description of documents or statements sought to be furnished to them under Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C. In para No.7 of the application filed by the accused No.1 it is stated that, accused No.1 learnt that the material made available to the Investigating Officer of this case was exculpatory in nature. How the said fact has come to the knowledge of accused has not been explained. The presumption or inference drawn by the accused himself that the Investigating Officer in Cr.No.484/2022 has collected some materials and they are of exculpatory in nature cannot itself be considered as sufficient to opine that, accused are entitled for the copies of the documents under Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C, without any basis or foundation.
12. The learned counsel for accused No.1 has produced the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. INX Media Private Limited and others in support of his argument. In the said case, the accused had sought for documents which
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR were not produced by CBI along with the final report pertaining to the said case in which the accused has sought for documents which were collected by the Investigating Officer. but were not produced along with the final report in that ease. But in the present case, the accused are seeking copies of the documents and evidence said to have been collected in another case, that is, Cr.No.484/2022. Even description of the documents or evidence said to have been collected by the Investigating Officer in Cr.No.484/2022 have not been explained in the application. The applications are very vague. The note of the Investigating Officer that, "Cr.No.484/2022 seems to be a counter blast of Cr. No. 484/2022" this case cannot itself be considered as sufficient to conclude that, the prosecution has withheld any documents in this case that too which are exculpatory in nature and thereby fair trial is denied to the accused as alleged by the learned counsel for accused. Therefore, in this case at this stage based on the note appended to column No.17 of the charge sheet, the court cannot conclude that, the prosecution has not furnished the documents as contemplated under Section 207(v) of Cr.P.C. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Applications filed under Section 207 of Cr.P.C is hereby dismissed."
The reasons for rejecting the application is found in paragraphs 8 to 10. Paragraph 10 supra is indicative of the fact that according to the investigating officer, the investigation is yet to complete and in case if there is further investigation, it is only then the petitioner would be entitled to any of the documents. It is also rejected on the ground that the applications are vague and the seeking of documents is not with clarity. The order supra, suffers from non-application of mind, on the score that charge sheet is filed against the accused in the month of January'2023 pursuant to which, *C.C.No.123/23 in Crime No.484/2022 has emerged. Therefore, the very reason of the investigating officer, which is accepted by the concerned Court and the order rendered thereon is, on the face of it erroneous, as the charge sheet is filed long ago.
11. Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., as observed by the Apex Court, is an important step during the trial.
If plethora of materials form the contents of the
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR charge sheet in a particular crime, the accused would be entitled to seek those documents, if they are withheld by the prosecution at the time of entering into their defence. The defence has to be built up from the commencement of the trial and not on ad hoc basis. Unless all the evidence collected during the course of investigation is furnished to the accused, it would cripple construction of appropriate defence. Right to defend cannot be rendered illusory by depriving any accused necessary evidence to defend him and still claim a fair trial is conducted. Therefore, the petition, on the bedrock of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the judgments quoted supra, deserves to succeed and if it is to succeed, the orders impugned are to be obliterated.
12. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The *Criminal Petitions are allowed in part.
(ii) Order dated 20-04-2023 passed in Spl.C.Nos.27 of 2023 and 28 of 2023 stands quashed.
(iii) The petitioner is held entitled to the documents sought for in the applications, if they are not already a part of the charge sheet material."
(Emphasis supplied)
8. In the light of the law as declared by this Court, following the judgments of the Apex Court, the petitions deserve to succeed only with a rider that the documents if traceable as is sought by the petitioner, shall be furnished at the appropriate stage of the trial.
- 19 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR
9. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petitions are allowed.
(ii) The orders dated 02-05-2023 passed in Sp.C.C.No.73 of 2016 and Spl.C.C.No.76 of 2016, by the XLVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru, impugned in both the petitions stand quashed.
(iii) The applications dated 06-04-2023 filed by the petitioner in Sp.C.C.No.73 of 2016 and Spl.C.C.No.76 of 2016 before the XLVII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru, appended in both the petitions stand allowed.
(iv) The petitioner is held entitled to the documents sought for in the applications dated 06-04-2023, and the prosecution shall furnish the documents, if traceable, at the appropriate stage of the trial.
- 20 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8065 CRL.P No. 4875 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 4878 of 2023 HC-KAR Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15