DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Vs. AMARENDRA DHARI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL.M.A. 11155/2021 (exemption from filing affirmed affidavits)

(2.) Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the petitioner states that there is no specific power with the learned Special Judge under the Cr.P.C. to pass directions to the petitioner to supply the copy of the ECIR. It is further stated that the impugned order was passed on the second application of the respondent seeking copy of the ECIR and the first application filed by the respondent was already withdrawn as not pressed. Further the respondent has no locus to ask for the copy of the ECIR for the reason, the petitioner is bound to file a complaint case and till summons are issued to the respondent, he cannot interfere in the proceedings nor ask for any document. Till date neither any complaint case has been filed nor has any process been issued against the respondent. The complaint having not been filed till date there can be no quashing of the complaint even for which the respondent may seek necessary documents.

(3.) It is further stated that no prejudice has been caused to the respondent by non-supply of the ECIR which is not like a FIR on the basis whereof investigation is started. Further the claim of the respondent that prejudice has been caused has been vaguely demonstrated. Learned Additional Solicitor General further states that even otherwise recording of a FIR is not necessary when anticipatory bail is sought and in case anticipatory bail can be granted without a FIR being registered, respondent cannot claim prejudice seeking a copy of the FIR. Further the claim of respondent that his defence is affected cannot be looked into at this stage for the reason the stage of leading defence evidence has not reached.