Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Basavaraju M U, is the accused in Sessions Case No. 62/2017 pending before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru. He filed an application under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking a copy of the Compact Disc containing the video recorded statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the jurisdictional Magistrate. The prosecution had not furnished this video recorded statement along with the charge sheet. The learned Sessions Judge rejected the application, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Dinesh @ Budha v. State of Rajasthan (2006) 3 SCC 771 and expressing apprehension that furnishing the CD might lead to tampering or misuse. The accused then filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Karnataka. The High Court observed that Section 207 Cr.P.C. mandates the court to furnish to the accused copies of all documents submitted with the charge sheet, including statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The court noted that the video recorded statement is a form of such statement and there is no provision in the Cr.P.C. that prohibits furnishing a copy to the accused. The court distinguished the Dinesh case, stating that it dealt with the evidentiary value of video recorded statements and not the right to receive copies. The High Court held that the Sessions Court's order was erroneous and quashed it, directing the Sessions Court to furnish a copy of the CD to the accused, subject to appropriate safeguards to prevent misuse.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Right of Accused to Copies of Documents - Section 207 Cr.P.C. - Video Recorded Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. - The accused is entitled to receive a copy of the Compact Disc containing the video recorded statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as part of the documents to be furnished under Section 207 Cr.P.C. - The Sessions Court erred in rejecting the application on the ground of apprehension of tampering or misuse, as there is no provision in Cr.P.C. prohibiting such furnishing - The decision in Dinesh @ Budha v. State of Rajasthan (2006) 3 SCC 771 is distinguishable as it dealt with the evidentiary value of such statements, not the right to receive copies (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the accused is entitled to a copy of the video recorded statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as part of the documents to be furnished under Section 207 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the order dated 14.12.2017 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in S.C. No. 62/2017, and directed the Sessions Court to furnish a copy of the Compact Disc containing the video recorded statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. to the accused, subject to appropriate safeguards to prevent misuse.
Law Points
- Right of accused to receive copies of documents including video recorded statement under Section 207 Cr.P.C.
- Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement includes video recording
- No provision in Cr.P.C. prohibiting furnishing of video recorded statement to accused
- Sessions Court's reliance on Dinesh @ Budha v. State of Rajasthan misplaced as that case dealt with different issue
