TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether an accused is entitled to a certified copy of the first information report before the police report is forwarded to the Magistrate; (ii) whether the accused is entitled to certified copies of the remand report, the order passed thereon, and the complaint, if any, made at the time of remand; (iii) whether the accused is entitled, before the filing of the charge-sheet, to copies of the inquest report, inquest statements, post-mortem certificate, requisition to the medical officer, rough sketch and observation mahazar; and (iv) whether the accused is entitled to a copy of the affidavit filed by the investigating officer seeking police custody after an order is made on that request.
Issue (i): Whether an accused is entitled to a certified copy of the first information report before the police report is forwarded to the Magistrate.
Analysis: The Court held that the constitutional requirement under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and the mandate of Section 50(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 require the arrested person to be informed of the full particulars of the offence. It further held that a written copy of the first information report is the most effective means of communicating those particulars, and that the accused may need the document to seek legal redress, including proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or Article 226. The Court rejected the view that the accused must wait until the police report is filed, and treated the earlier contrary view as inconsistent with the constitutional and statutory scheme.
Conclusion: The accused is entitled, on application and payment of charges, to a certified copy of the first information report even before the final report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is forwarded.
Issue (ii): Whether the accused is entitled to certified copies of the remand report, the order passed thereon, and the complaint, if any, made at the time of remand.
Analysis: The Court held that the remand report is not a document contemplated by the Code for supply to the accused and is essentially a summary of the case diary, which is protected by the statutory restriction in Section 172(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On the other hand, the order of remand is a judicial order and the accused may require it to challenge the legality of detention. Likewise, any complaint made by the accused at remand and recorded by the Magistrate forms part of the judicial record and is not hit by any statutory bar.
Conclusion: The accused is not entitled to a copy of the remand report or the requisition for remand, but is entitled to a certified copy of the remand order and of any complaint made by him at remand together with the order passed thereon.
Issue (iii): Whether the accused is entitled, before the filing of the charge-sheet, to copies of the inquest report, inquest statements, post-mortem certificate, requisition to the medical officer, rough sketch and observation mahazar.
Analysis: The Court held that these documents are prepared during investigation and form part of the investigative materials collected for the prosecution. It reasoned that the statutory scheme of Sections 173 and 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not permit their supply to the accused before the police report is forwarded, and that the general right under the Evidence Act cannot override the specific procedural bar. The Court also treated the inquest statements as not available for such pre-charge-sheet supply.
Conclusion: The accused is not entitled to certified copies of the inquest report, inquest statements, post-mortem certificate, requisition to the medical officer, rough sketch or observation mahazar before the police report is forwarded under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Issue (iv): Whether the accused is entitled to a copy of the affidavit filed by the investigating officer seeking police custody after an order is made on that request.
Analysis: The Court held that the affidavit supporting the request for police custody is not open to supply before any order is passed, but once the Magistrate acts upon it and passes an order, the affidavit becomes part of the record. In the absence of any express statutory prohibition, the accused may obtain a copy of both the affidavit and the order made thereon on payment of prescribed charges.
Conclusion: The accused is entitled to a copy of the affidavit seeking police custody and the order passed thereon after the Magistrate has acted on that request.
Final Conclusion: The references were substantially answered in favour of the accused to the extent of access to the first information report, remand order, remand-related complaint, and post-order custody affidavit, but the claimed pre-charge-sheet access to the remand report and core investigative documents was denied.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the Constitution and the Code require prompt communication of the grounds of arrest, and where no specific statutory bar exists, a copy of the relevant document may be supplied even before the police report is filed; but investigative materials protected by a specific procedural embargo remain unavailable until the stage fixed by the Code.
TaxTMI 
