Accused Can't Be Denied Certified Copy Of Documents Forming Part Of Chargesheet After Commencement Of Trial: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that an accused cannot be denied the certified or attested copy of documents forming part of the chargesheet after commencement of trial.

While granting relief to two accused persons, Justice Vikas Mahajan said:

“Even assuming that copy of the hard disk in question was supplied to the accused persons at the stage of Section 207 Cr. P.C. proceedings, still the right of the petitioner to ask for the certified copy of documents which form part of the chargesheet cannot be negated.”

The Court said that it it may happen that the documents which are part of the chargesheet, even after they have been supplied to the accused persons, might get lost, and thus, the accused can still ask for the certified copy lr attested copy of the same at his own expense.

“Non-supply of a copy of such documents will deprive the accused persons of a meaningful opportunity to put forth his defence which includes cross-examination as well. Such a denial would thus, mean a negation of the principle of natural justice,” the Court said.

It however added that while considering such a request, the court has to guard against the frivolous requests which are only aimed to delay the trial.

The accused had moved the Court challenging a trial court order which allowed the application filed by the State and gave an opportunity to recall a prosecution witness for exhibiting a hard disk.

While the matter was pending, an application was moved by the accused persons seeking a direction on the trial court to furnish copy of the hard disk and to defer the recording of evidence of the prosecution witness till further orders.

It was submitted that the prosecution witness was partly re-examined and that his further examination was deferred as the hard disk could not be played for want of data cable. It was submitted that a copy of the hard disk was not supplied to the accused persons till date.

On the other hand, the prosecution contended that all documents which were part of the chargesheet, including the hard disk, were supplied to the accused persons.

Allowing the application, the Court noted that none of the order sheets specifically mention that a cloned copy of the hard disk, which was an electronic record, was provided to the petitioners accused persons.

The Court said that it was not a case where the petitioners had delayed the trial and that it was not the case of the prosecution that in providing cloned copy of the hard disk, there could be an issue as to the privacy of complainant or witness nor the document was a voluminous 'non-electronic record'.

“As noted above, the order sheets of the trial court though record that documents filed along with the chargesheet were supplied to the petitioners/accused persons but there is no specific mention of 'electronic record' in the form of a 'hard disk' having been supplied to the petitioners/accused persons,” the Court said.

It directed the trial court to provide a cloned copy of the hard disk to the accused persons at their expense.

Title: GOPAL MISHRA & ANR v. STATE

Click here to read order