PMLA disclosure at pre-charge stage cannot extend beyond prosecution-relied documents under the special trial framework.

In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the accused was not entitled at the pre-charge stage to obtain every deficient or illegible document under Sections 207 and 208 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The special trial framework under Section 44(1)(d) of the PMLA did not require the CrPC to apply mutatis mutandis so as to enlarge disclosure beyond the documents relied upon by the prosecution. Because the matter had not yet reached the stage of trial, the accused could not demand all material collected during investigation. Authorities on fair access to material were distinguished as governing the course of trial, not the pre-charge stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the accused was entitled at the pre-charge stage to obtain all deficient or illegible documents under Sections 207 and 208 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether the trial court could direct supply of documents beyond those relied upon by the prosecution.

Analysis: The proceedings arose from a complaint under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, a special enactment providing its own trial framework under Section 44(1)(d). The writ court held that the procedure under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not apply mutatis mutandis to such proceedings so as to enlarge the accused's entitlement beyond the documents relied upon by the prosecution. It further held that the matter was at the pre-charge stage, which is not yet a stage of trial, and therefore the accused could not insist on supply of every document gathered during investigation. The reliance placed on decisions concerning fair-trial access to material was distinguished as applicable in the course of trial, not at the pre-charge stage.

Conclusion: The petitioners were not entitled to the additional or deficient documents sought under Sections 207 and 208 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the challenge to the impugned order failed.

---