Case title:
Sri Anish Loharuka Vs. The State of West Bengal
Date of Order:
10/05/2022
Bench:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jay Sengupta
Parties:
Petitioner - Sri Anish Loharuka
Respondent – State of West Bengal
SUBJECT
Two applications were filed by the petitioners requesting the supply of document which was later denied by the Court stating that when there exists an issue of privacy or identity the documents cannot be supplied to the accused.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
Section 207 of CrPC - Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents.
OVERVIEW
The petitioner in this case had filed two applications requesting the supply of certain documents and contents of the hard disk that was seized.
The Trial Court refused to provide a copy of the hard disk seized stating that cloning of the contents in it may damage the drive.
Other legible documents to be supplied to the petitioner were not submitted and the Trial Court went ahead and fixed a date for framing of charge.
ISSUES RAISED
Whether supply of documents to the accused when there is a possibility of disclosure of identity of a minor victim would be expedient under Section 207 of CrPC?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT
- The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that an accused had an inalienable right of being supplied all the documents which could be relied against him in a criminal trial.
- In P. Gopalakrishnan Vs. State of Kerala it was stated that the accused or his lawyer can inspect the contents of the memory card more than once and also has the right to send such a document for examination by an expert.
- Documents relied against an accused had to be supplied to him regardless of any issue of privacy.
- The Trial Court without any basis held that the document, if cloned, would damage the drive.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT
- The learned Counsel for the State argues that when an issue of privacy of a complaint or witness or disclosure of identity exists then the documents cannot be supplied to the accused or his lawyer.
- Only inspection can be done from the hard drive of contents or materials.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
- The Court stated that the inference drawn by the Trial Court that the cloning of the hard disk would damage the drive was not based on the opinion of an expert.
- The documents relied upon by the prosecution in a criminal trial must be supplied to the accused under section 207 of the CrPC. In cases wherein issues such as privacy, identity exist the Court may provide the documents just for inspection; this was held in the case of P. Gopalakrishnan.
CONCLUSION
The Court concluded by stating that the accused had a right to inspect such documents along with his lawyer and that the legible copies of documents should be supplied to the accused with the permission to inspect the evidence along with his learned advocate. The Trial Court shall fix a date for charge after the supply of documents for inspection. Therefore, the impugned order earlier passed by the Trial Court was set and the above-mentioned directions were provided.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
