TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 129
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gdoh, Subhro Sanyal, Shikhar Garg, Pragyan Sharma, Saurabh Trivedi, Aviral Saxena, Yusuf Khan, Ms. Aruna Mathur, Avneesh Arputham, Ms. Anuradha Arputham for Arputham Aruna & Co., Ankit Roy, Lagnesh Mishra, Parikshit Angadi, Ms. Puja Singh, Ms. Aagam Kaur, Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Amit Kumar Singh, K. Luikang Michael, Elix Gangmei, Anshuman Srivastav, Apoorva Bhumesha, Sunil Fernandes and Nikesh Tyagi, Advocates and Krishnayan Sen, Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, G. Prakash, Parijat Sinha, Ranjan Mukherjee, Rohit K. Singh, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Saurabh Trivedi, V. N. Raghupathy and Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AORs, for the Respondent. ORDER Issue Rule. 2. In this writ petition, preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Youth ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... its fold enforcement of the rights of an accused but also the rights of the victim. The State has a duty to enforce the human rights of a citizen providing for fair and impartial investigation against any person accused of commission of a cognizable offence, which may include its own officers. In certain situations even a witness to the crime may seek for and shall be granted protection by the State." 5. In Som Mittal v. Government of Karnataka - (2008) 3 SCC 753, the Court has ruled thus :- "The right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution is a valuable right, and hence should not be lightly interfered with. It was won by the people of Europe and America after tremendous historical struggles and sacrifices. One is reminded....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner has also drawn our attention to a Division Bench decision of Delhi High Court rendered in Court on its Own Motion through Mr. Ajay Chaudhary v. State - (2010) 175 DLT 110 (DB). 8. On being asked, Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India, has submitted that the directions issued by the High Court of Delhi can be applied with certain modifications. Learned Additional Solicitor General has also drawn our attention to Paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed in an interlocutory application in the present writ petition. The said paragraph reads as under :- "4. That is it respectfully submitted that Central Government is supporting all the States to set up a mechanism for online filing o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....port can submit an application through his representative/agent/ parokar for grant of a certified copy before the concerned police officer or to the Superintendent of Police on payment of such fee which is payable for obtaining such a copy from the Court. On such application being made, the copy shall be supplied within twenty-four hours. (c) Once the First Information Report is forwarded by the police station to the concerned Magistrate or any Special Judge, on an application being filed for certified copy on behalf of the accused, the same shall be given by the Court concerned within two working days. The aforesaid direction has nothing to do with the statutory mandate inhered under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. (d) The copies of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....clude concept of privacy regard being had to the nature of the FIR. The examples given with regard to the sensitive cases are absolutely illustrative and are not exhaustive. (g) If an FIR is not uploaded, needless to say, it shall not enure per se a ground to obtain the benefit under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. (h) In case a copy of the FIR is not provided on the ground of sensitive nature of the case, a person a grieved by the said action, after disclosing his identity, can submit a representation to the Superintendent of Police or any person holding the equivalent post in the State. The Superintendent of Police shall constitute a committee of three officers which shall deal with the said grievance. As far as the Metropolitan ci....