Supply of unrelied seized material at charge stage remains under consideration, with trial court proceedings stayed pending reply.

At the charge stage, the petition concerned whether the accused could obtain the list and copies of unrelied seized material, and whether the trial court proceedings should remain stayed pending response. The court did not decide the substantive entitlement issue; it noted the rival positions, referred to the trial court's direction for preparation and supply of the list of unrelied material, and called for the respondent's status report/reply. Proceedings before the trial court were stayed until the next hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused was entitled, at the stage of consideration of charge, to supply of the list and copies of unrelied seized material, and whether further proceedings before the trial court should remain stayed pending reply and further consideration.

Analysis: The petition invoked Article 226 seeking quashing of the trial court's order that had directed only preparation and supply of a list of unrelied material. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court's directions in criminal trials requiring a list of other seized materials not relied upon to be furnished to the accused, while the respondent maintained that such supply was to be worked out at the trial stage and not at the stage of framing of charge. The court recorded the rival positions, noted the impugned order directing supply of the list of unrelied material, and considered the need for a status report/reply from the respondent.

Conclusion: The court did not finally decide the substantive controversy and directed filing of the respondent's status report/reply, while staying proceedings before the trial court till the next date of hearing.

---