Accused is entitled to seek copies or production of documents on which prosecution does not rely
The ratio of
the aforesaid decision cannot be said to be that the accused is not
entitled to seek copies or the production of documents on which the
prosecution does not rely, for the purpose of establishing or supporting
his defence. What the aforesaid judgment lays down is that so far as
the documents which are relied upon by the prosecution are
concerned, there would be no question of not furnishing copies
thereof to the accused, and it would be the statutory duty and
obligation of the prosecution as well as the Court to see that the
accused is furnished with the copies of all such documents; but this
positive assertion cannot be construed as laying down a negative,
namely, that the accused under no circumstances can seek copies or
production of documents on which the prosecution does not rely. All
that the judgment lays down is that with respect to the documents,
which are not relied upon by the prosecution, there being no
statutory duty cast upon the prosecution to furnish such documents
to the accused, the question of furnishing copies of such documents
would depend on what would be fair and just in a given situation.
That the documents relied upon by the prosecution must essentially
be furnished to the accused, does not mean that other documents,
howsoever important they may be from the point of view of the
accused, need not be given to him though available with the
prosecution.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.973 OF 2012
the aforesaid decision cannot be said to be that the accused is not
entitled to seek copies or the production of documents on which the
prosecution does not rely, for the purpose of establishing or supporting
his defence. What the aforesaid judgment lays down is that so far as
the documents which are relied upon by the prosecution are
concerned, there would be no question of not furnishing copies
thereof to the accused, and it would be the statutory duty and
obligation of the prosecution as well as the Court to see that the
accused is furnished with the copies of all such documents; but this
positive assertion cannot be construed as laying down a negative,
namely, that the accused under no circumstances can seek copies or
production of documents on which the prosecution does not rely. All
that the judgment lays down is that with respect to the documents,
which are not relied upon by the prosecution, there being no
statutory duty cast upon the prosecution to furnish such documents
to the accused, the question of furnishing copies of such documents
would depend on what would be fair and just in a given situation.
That the documents relied upon by the prosecution must essentially
be furnished to the accused, does not mean that other documents,
howsoever important they may be from the point of view of the
accused, need not be given to him though available with the
prosecution.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.973 OF 2012
