9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (9) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments of which the copies are sought are in fact muddamal Articles seized at the time of search of the accused by the investigating officer in the course of raid. The documents asked for are referred in the application. After hearing the parties, the learned Special Judge rejected the application on the ground that the documents sought for by the accused are not the documents as referred to in Sub-section (7) of Section 173 and the documents sought for being the muddamal Articles, no doubt are in nature of documents, could not be supplied to the accused as the accused are not entitled to the same. Learned Special Judge also observed that those documents are relied on by the prosecution as muddamal and not as documents referred to in Section 173(7) of the Code. However, the learned Special Judge has granted permission to take down copy thereof with the previous permission of the Court if they so choose. Accused petitioners have challenged this order by this petition. 3. Mr. Parikh appearing for the petitioners contended before this Court that simply because the documents are seized as muddamal Articles, they do not cease to be documents and as they are documents, they are the doc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xtracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation; (b) the statements recorded under Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses. Section 173(5)(b) is not relevant for our purpose being pertaining to statements recorded under Section 161. There is no dispute of the fact that the report in the instant case is submitted under Section 170 of the Code. Clause (a) of Sub-section (5) of Section 173 puts an obligation on the investigating officer to provide the accused with all the documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation. The question is whether this Clause (a) of Sub-section (5) of Section 173 also covers the muddamal Articles if are consisting of documents. 7. Section 165 of the Code provides for search by Police Officer and in a search carried out under Section 165 of the Code, provisions of Section 100 of the Code is to apply. Sub-section (5) of Section 165 provides for copies of any record of grounds for search made under Sub-section (1) or Sub-se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Mr. Parikh relying on Praveenkwnar's case (supra) contended that even though the prosecution does not rely on the documents as their evidence to prove the case against the accused, but are in possession of the prosecution, then if the said documents are required by the defence, the defence cannot be deprived of the opportunity by withholding the said documents. In Praveenkumar's case, the question was supply of enlarged photographs of writing in dispute relied on by an expert while giving his opinion before the Court. There the Court has said that if the expert has based his opinion on the strength of enlarged photographs, mere reproduction of reasons would not be sufficient. The Court would also not be able to appreciate whether the expert has given proper opinion or not without referring to the enlarged photographs and finding out the points of similarity or dissimilarity whatever they may be. So, it is clear that in order to appreciate the evidence and opinion of expert on handwriting, enlarged photographs would be necessary and even if the prosecution does not produce them or merely say orally that they did not propose to rely on that, then also they are the docu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, 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 of the Code is very clear as to what documents and the police report the accused is entitled to as a matter of right. In Section 207 it is also made clear that the accused is required to be supplied the documents or relevant extracts of the documents forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report recorded under Sub-section (5) of Section 173. Documents contemplated in Sub-section (5) of Section 173 are the documents which the prosecution will rely on as documentary evidence on being legally proved under the Evidence Act. Muddamal Articles even if they consist of documents are not required to be proved as per Evidence Act and read in evidence but they are identified as being seized from accused. If the Articles form any incriminating circumstance, the same may be considered without going into the contents thereof. Muddamal Articles, if consists of any document. Is it a documentary evidence as referred in the Evidence Act? It is necessary to mention at this juncture that in case if the prosecution tries to prove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its ordinary sense. He contended that mere fact that giving the meaning of the word document to Articles which happens to be documents, if it causes some inconvenience or unjust result that by itself does not entitle the Court to refuse to give its ordinary meaning. To substantiate this he has relied on a judgment in the case of Nasiruddin v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal . In the case of Nasiruddin (supra), the question before the Court was whether 'or' can be read as 'and'. There the Court while considering that aspect in the context of the word used in the concerned statute has observed as under: If the inconvenience is an absurd inconvenience by reading enactment in its ordinary sense whereas, if it is read in a manner in which it is capable, though not in an ordinary sense there would not be any inconvenience at all. There would be reason why one should not read according to its ordinary grammatical meaning. Where the words are plain, the Court would not make any alteration. Here, in this case, there is no question of giving any different meaning to the word document referred in Sub-section 5(a) of Section 173 of the Code. Documents referred in Sub-sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
