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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the accused, at the pre-charge stage in a complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, is entitled to supply of unrelied upon seized documents, or only to the relied upon documents and, at most, a list of unrelied upon documents.
Analysis: The complaint had been filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the charges had not yet been framed. The respondent stated that all relied upon documents had already been supplied, and the dispute was confined to documents not relied upon in the complaint. The Court relied on the principle that at the stage of framing of charges the defence of the accused cannot be examined and a roving or fishing inquiry is impermissible. It further considered the Supreme Court's directions on criminal trial practice and the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules, which contemplate supply of relied upon material and a list of other materials not relied upon, but do not mandate supply of the unrelied upon documents themselves. The Court also held that the request for a blanket supply of all seized documents was premature at the pre-charge stage.
Conclusion: The accused is not entitled to supply of unrelied upon documents at the pre-charge stage, though an appropriate application may be moved for a list of such documents.