2012 (9) TMI 1133 - SC - Indian Laws

The right of the accused to a fair trial - examination of an accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. - Inspection of certified copies or in the alternative for of certain unmarked and unexhibited documents - the examination of the appellant (accused No.2) u/s 313 Cr.P.C. is going on, While such examination of the appellant was midway and she had answered over 500 questions out of the contemplated double the number, an application was filed by the appellant before the learned trial court seeking certified copies of certain unmarked and unexhibited documents which were claimed to be in the custody of the court on being so forwarded alongwith the report of investigation under Section 173(5) Cr.P.C. the appellant filed application before the learned trial court, seeking an inspection of the said unmarked and unexhibited documents in respect of which the earlier application was filed but rejected. HELD THAT - This Court do not see as to how the appellant (second accused) can be denied an access to the documents in respect of which prayers have been made in the applications. While the anxiety to bring the trial to its earliest conclusion has to be shared it is fundamental that in the process none of the well entrenched principles of law that have been laboriously built by illuminating judicial precedents is sacrificed or compromised. In no circumstance, the cause of justice can be made to suffer, though, undoubtedly, it is highly desirable that the finality of any trial is achieved in the quickest possible time. In view of what has been stated above and to balance the need to bring the prosecution in the present case to its earliest conclusion and at the same time to protect and preserve the right of the accused to a fair trial we are of the view that the following directions would take care of the conflicting interests that have surfaced in the present case - (1)The accused No.2, i.e. the appellant herein, be allowed an inspection of the unmarked and unexhibited documents referred to by her in the application filed in the Court of XXXVI Additional City Civil Sessions Judge, Bangalore; (2) Such inspection will be completed within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order by the learned trial court. The venue of such inspection and also the persons who will be permitted to be present at the time of inspection will be decided by the learned trial court. (3) The right of inspection conferred by this order will not affect the validity of any part of the trial till date, including, the examination of the accused No.1 under Section 313 Cr.P.C. which has since been completed or any part of such examination of the second accused that may have been completed in the meantime. (4) In the event the third and the fourth accused also desire inspection of the unmarked and unexhibited documents such inspection will be allowed by the learned trial court. In such an event the process of inspection will also be simultaneously carried out and completed within the period of 21 days stipulated in the present order.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of applications for certified copies or inspection of unmarked and unexhibited documents.
2. Compliance with Section 207 Cr.P.C. and the accused's right to a fair trial.
3. The role of the Public Prosecutor and the duty of disclosure.
4. The impact of the denial of documents on the accused's examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of Applications for Certified Copies or Inspection of Unmarked and Unexhibited Documents:
The appellant challenged two orders of the High Court of Karnataka that upheld the trial court's rejection of her applications for certified copies or inspection of certain unmarked and unexhibited documents. These documents were in the court's custody, forwarded along with the investigation report under Section 173(5) Cr.P.C. The trial court and High Court rejected these applications, reasoning that the charges were framed in 2007, and the appellant had not previously raised any grievances regarding the provision of documents. The High Court also noted that the appellant had answered over 532 questions in her examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. without raising any issues about these documents. The court held that non-furnishing of these documents would not automatically render the prosecution bad in law unless it resulted in prejudice to the accused, which could be decided on merits.

2. Compliance with Section 207 Cr.P.C. and the Accused's Right to a Fair Trial:
The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of a fair trial, which includes the right of the accused to access all relevant documents. Section 207 Cr.P.C. mandates that the court must furnish the accused with copies of the police report, FIR, statements recorded under Section 161, confessions, and any other relevant documents forwarded under Section 173(5). The court noted that the appellant's request for documents was not raised earlier but recognized that the accused's perception of prejudice could vary and should be addressed promptly to ensure a fair trial.

3. The Role of the Public Prosecutor and the Duty of Disclosure:
The court reiterated the duty of the Public Prosecutor to ensure fairness in the proceedings. The Public Prosecutor must disclose all relevant documents, even those not relied upon by the prosecution, if they could assist the defense. The court cited the case of Sidhartha Vashisht alias Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT) of Delhi, emphasizing that the prosecutor's role includes ensuring that all relevant facts are brought to the court's notice for a just determination of the truth.

4. The Impact of the Denial of Documents on the Accused's Examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C.:
The court highlighted the importance of the accused's examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., which allows the accused to explain incriminating circumstances and put forward their version of events. The court noted that denying access to relevant documents could prejudice the accused, as incomplete or incorrect answers during this examination could strengthen the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that the accused must be given an opportunity to inspect the documents to ensure a fair trial.

Conclusion and Directions:
The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant should be allowed to inspect the unmarked and unexhibited documents to ensure a fair trial. The court directed that the inspection be completed within 21 days, with the trial court deciding the venue and the persons allowed to be present. The court clarified that this inspection would not affect the validity of the trial conducted so far, including the examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The court also allowed other accused to inspect the documents if they desired, with the inspection process to be completed simultaneously.

Disposition:
Both appeals were disposed of with the directions provided above.