TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 841
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....attention of this Court towards impugned order passed by the Trial Court of dated 15.02.2024 submits that the Trial Court has committed a patent illegality in rejecting the request of the applicant to provide him post trap memo/ recovery/ arresting memo. Elaborating further, it is submitted that the applicant has been arrested on 31.01.2024 and was produced in the court on 1.02.20224. However, no copy of the post trap memo/ recovery memo has been provided to the applicant. 4. It is further submitted that the grounds of arrest may only be inferred from the post trap memo/ recovery memo of date 31.1.2024 and it is only after perusal of the said trap memo/ recovery memo, it may be ensured that the arrest of the applicant was justified or not, in the given set of circumstances. 5. It is also submitted that in absence of trap memo/ recovery memo, the applicant is being prejudiced in defending himself properly and thus, the respondent- C.B.I. be directed to provide a copy of the arresting/ recovery memo of date 31.01.2024 to the applicant. 6. Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I. submits that the applicant has been provided a copy of the arrest memo, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd vital witnesses are yet to be examined and documents are to be collected and thus, the copy of the post trap memo cannot be provided to the accused. 9. Hon'ble Supreme Court In RE: To Issue Certain Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies in Criminal Trials Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. has approved Draft Criminal Rules of practice, 2021 wherein with regard to supply of documents under Sections 173, 207 and 208 Cr.P.C., it is highlighted as under:- "(I) Every Accused shall be supplied with statements of witness recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and a list of documents, material objects and exhibits seized during investigation and relied upon by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) in accordance with Sections 207 and 208, Cr.P.C. Explanation: The list of statements, documents, material objects and exhibits shall specify statements, documents, material objects and exhibits that are not relied upon by the Investigating Officer." 10. The matter was finally disposed of with the following directions:- "19. The court is of the opinion that the Draft Rules of Criminal Practice, 2021, (which are annexed to the present order, and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d accordingly, the Draft Rules have been accordingly modified. [Rule 4(1)]" (emphasis supplied) ......... 10. The Draft Rules framed, therefore, were a product of a thorough consultative exercise undertaken to remedy asymmetries caused by the lack of uniformity in Rules across States, which could hamper appreciation of evidence, and in turn delay proceedings, especially at the appellate stage. Recognition of the need to streamline trials or mitigate delays, however, cannot come at the cost of the accused's right to fair trial. 11. Taking note of the case law in Siddharth Vasisht @ Manu Sharma v. State of NCT Delhi, this court in Manoj & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, highlighted the dual role played by the public prosecutor and the court in safeguarding the accused's right to fair investigation and trial, by scrutinizing the material and ensuring fair disclosure. In light of this, and the aforementioned draft Rule 4, this court went on to hold in Manoj that: "...In view of the above discussion, this court holds that the prosecution, in the interests of fairness, should as a matter of rule, in all criminal trials, comply with the abov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... according to us, is the core issue in the case which must be answered affirmatively. In this regard, we would like to be specific in saying that we find it difficult to agree with the view VK. Sasikala v State, 2012 SCC OnLine Kar 9209] taken by the High Court that the accused must be made to await the conclusion of the trial to test the plea of prejudice that he may have raised. Such a plea must be answered at the earliest and certainly before the conclusion of the trial, even though it may be raised by the accused belatedly. This is how the scales of justice in our criminal jurisprudence have to be balanced." (emphasis supplied) 13. It is true that this court in V.K. Sasikala (supra) was dealing with material/documents that were forwarded to the Magistrate under Section 173 CrPC, but were not being relied upon by the prosecution. However, it is undeniable that there could also arise a situation wherein the investigating officer, ignores or does not rely on seized documents, material or evidence which favours the accused, and fails to forward it to the Magistrate [as required under Section 173 CrPC, specifically sub- section (6)). Merely because it is not already on t....