Bombay High Court
Shilpa Mahadeorao Sasane vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 September, 2017
Bench: V.L. Achliya
904-CRWP-883-17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 883 OF 2017
Shilpa Mahadeorao Sasane
Age: 27 years, Occu.: Service,
R/o At post Gandhi, Tal. Georai,
Dist. Beed. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra
Through Incharge Police Station Officer,
Anti Corruption Bureau, Beed. ..RESPONDENT
....
Mr. Prasanna Dadpe, Advocate h/f Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for
petitioner.
Mr. K.S. Patil, A.P.P. for respondent.
....
CORAM : V.L. ACHLIYA, J.
DATED : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the
parties heard finally at the stage of admission.
2. By the present petition filed under Section 227 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13 th
June, 2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special
1 / 5
904-CRWP-883-17.odt
Judge, Beed in Special (ACB) Case No. 15 of 2014. By the impugned
order, the learned Special Judge, Beed has rejected the application
Exhibit 25 filed by the petitioner - accused seeking second copy of the
compact disk produced by the prosecution as an alleged conversation
between the complainant and the accused. From the perusal of the order
it reveals that the application was rejected mainly for the reason that the
Court has formed opinion that in the process of preparing compact disk
from the memory card, there is likelihood of damage being caused to the
original recording in the memory card.
3. In view of the limited challenge raised in the petition, it is not
necessary to discuss the facts in detail. The petitioner is facing trial for
committing offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with
Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The prosecution has
filed the charge-sheet alongwith the memory card wherein the
conversation between the complainant and the petitioner - accused is
claimed to be recorded. The transcript of the conversation has been
provided to the petitioner - accused. The petitioner - accused has
insisted for providing the copy of the compact disk of audio recording of
the conversation recorded in the memory card for the purpose of
preparing his defense. By referring Section 207 of the Code of Criminal
2 / 5
904-CRWP-883-17.odt
Procedure, the learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that it is a
statutory obligation on the part of the prosecution to provide the entire
copy of the charge-sheet which includes any other document forming the
part of charge-sheet i.e. the report filed under Section 173 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. The learned Counsel submits that as per the
provision of Section 207, the accused is entitled to get the copy of the
conversation recorded between the complainant and the petitioner -
accused. The learned A.P.P. submits that present application is filed with
an intention to protract the hearing of the case. He submits that the
charge-sheet is filed in the year 2014 and under the pretext of this
application, the petitioner - accused is protracting the hearing.
4. In order to ascertain as to whether the copy of the compact
disk can be supplied to the petitioner, the report of the Investigating
Officer was called in the matter. Vide report dated 23 rd August, 2017, the
Investigating Officer has reported that the memory card in which the
alleged conversation was recorded has been deposited with the Sessions
Court, Beed and as such, expressed inability to provide the copy of the
same. Since the learned Judge has observed in the impugned order that
the memory card may likely to be damaged in the process of making
compact disk, but the same was not found to be supported with the
3 / 5
904-CRWP-883-17.odt
opinion of expert, report was called from the learned Special Judge. The
report dated 12th September, 2017 reads as under:-
"On 13.8.2014 Investigation officer has filed final
report before the Sessions Court at Beed. On perusal of the
charge-sheet it shows that two memory cards first is conversation
during pre-trap panchnama and second is conversation during
trap alongwith other memory card, which consist of voice sample
of accused, were sent to FSL Kalina, Mumbai. Thus, alongwith
charge-sheet the I.O. has not provided additional copy of CD. On
14.2.2017 I.O. has deposited three sealed packets alongwith
examination report received from FSL Kalina Mumbai in this
Court which consist of three memory cards. Record does not
consist opinion of any expert as to likelihood of damage to the
original memory card if its copy is prepared.
I have consulted Shri Pathak, who is working as
District System Administrator in Computer Section District
Court, Beed as to preparing copy of CD from memory card.
Accordingly, there is no impediment in preparing copy of CD
from memory card.
In the light of this, copy of CD can be prepared from
the memory card."
5. In view of the report received in the matter, it is not necessary
to adjudge the legality of the impugned order on merit. In view of the
report received that the copy can be prepared from the memory card, the
4 / 5
904-CRWP-883-17.odt
petition can be conveniently disposed off by setting aside the order and
directing the Trial Court to decide the application afresh in the light of
the report submitted.
6. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The learned
Special Judge, Beed is directed to decide the application Exhibit 35 afresh
by giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and pass appropriate order
in the light of the report dated 12 th September, 2017. In order to address
the contention raised that the petitioner - accused is protracting the
hearing of the case, under the guise of filing such application, the trial
Court is directed to expedite the hearing of the case. The petitioner -
accused is directed to co-operate the Trial Court in expeditious disposal of
the case. In the result, petition is allowed. Rule made absolute in the
above terms.
( V. L. ACHLIYA, J. )
SSD
5 / 5
