The Supreme Court has held that an accused can not only inspect documents seized during investigation but not relied upon by the prosecution, but can also have specific documents brought before witnesses during the trial if they are relevant to the defence, settling a contentious procedural issue that has surfaced in several high-profile criminal cases.
The Supreme Court itself has taken different cases at different stages to examine the issue. Because the question of what happens to material collected during investigation but consciously not relied upon by the prosecution has repeatedly troubled criminal courts, the judgment is significant.
Those documents would have to be recorded in writing, signed by both sides and produced before the trial court without delay. CBI had challenged orders directing it to produce several documents sought by accused Anil Dixit under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including documents seized during investigation but not relied upon in the charge sheet. The issue resurfaced in the landmark criminal-procedure jurisprudence concerning Sidhartha Vashisht alias Manu Sharma (2010) and, subsequently, in Manoj Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (2022), where the Supreme Court dealt with the prosecution’s obligation to disclose material collected during investigation that may have exculpatory value. The 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case involving Devangana Kalita has brought the controversy squarely back before the Supreme Court. On June 5 this year, the Delhi high court held that while an accused has no absolute right to copies of unrelied material, she could seek inspection of such documents seized during the investigation.
The Supreme Court accepted this approach, but made it clear that inspection would not be the end of the matter. The court directed CBI to keep the files ready when the trial takes place. Alternatively, the agency could allow the accused or an authorised representative to identify the particular documents required during inspection. The ruling creates a practical bridge between the accused’s right to inspect material not relied upon and its eventual use in the trial. A document need not have been relied upon by the prosecution at the charge sheet stage to become relevant to the defence later. Once identified during inspection, the accused can seek its production when the relevant prosecution witness enters the witness box, or use it while leading defence evidence.
CBI told the Supreme Court that the documents were voluminous and offered inspection instead While the accused sought copies of a large volume of such material.
