Case Note & Summary
The applicants, Harinarayan Gulabrao Sardar and Mangesh Rajendra Madavi, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging an order dated 14-01-2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Trial No. 43/2015. The impugned order rejected the applicants' application under Section 91 CrPC seeking production of documents of enquiry conducted by the Police Station Officer, Murtizapur regarding earlier reports dated 04-09-2014 and 06-09-2014. The applicants were facing prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 376(g), 342, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The FIR was lodged on 04-11-2014. Prior to this, the first informant had lodged a report on 04-09-2014 (Station Diary Serial No. 45/2014), and one Biju Pralhad Solanke lodged a report on 06-09-2014 (Station Diary Serial No. 19/2014). An enquiry ensued, and statements of several persons were recorded. The police found no cognizable offence and took no action. The applicants contended that these documents were essential for their defence. The High Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, held that the documents sought were relevant for a fair trial and the rejection of the Section 91 application was not sustainable. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the trial court to reconsider the application and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 91 - Production of Documents - Right to Fair Trial - The applicants-accused sought production of documents of enquiry conducted by the police regarding earlier reports dated 04-09-2014 and 06-09-2014, which were prior to the FIR dated 04-11-2014. The Additional Sessions Judge rejected the application. The High Court held that the documents sought are relevant for a fair trial and the rejection was not sustainable. The court directed the trial court to reconsider the application and pass appropriate orders. (Paras 1-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of an application under Section 91 CrPC for production of documents of enquiry conducted by the police regarding earlier reports is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 14-01-2019 is set aside. The trial court is directed to reconsider the application under Section 91 CrPC and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Section 91 CrPC
- Right to fair trial
- Production of documents
- Enquiry reports
- Pre-FIR reports
