VARGHESE KURUVILA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can the accused in a criminal trial lay his hands on statements, documents and material objects collected during the course of investigation, but which are not relied upon by the Investigating Officer? It is this question which falls for consideration in this Criminal Miscellaneous Case, which stems from the interpretation of Rule 19(4) of the Criminal Rules of Practice, Kerala, 1982 (the Rules, for short). Before referring to the Rule as such, it is necessary to advert to the factual premise, which occasioned the above Crl.M.C. The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.3/2014 of the Special Court, Kottayam. The offences alleged are under Sec. 7 and Sec. 13(1)(d), read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case was scheduled for trial on 5/8/2024. While so, on 15/5/2024, the petitioner/accused filed an application (Annexure-A2) under Rule 19(4) of the Rules, seeking a direction to furnish a list of documents and material objects, including the statements, documents and material objects which are not relied upon by the investigation officer. By Annexure-A3 order, the same was dismissed by the learned Special Judge, finding that Rule 19(4) was introduced as an amendment of the year 2022, whereas the final report in the case was filed as far back as, in 2014. Learned Special Judge found that there was no mandate to supply the documents sought for in Annexure-A2 application at the time of filing the final report. On such premise, Annexure-A2 was dismissed vide Annexure-A3, which is under challenge in this Crl.M.C.

(2.) Having regard to the complexity of the issue involved, this Court appointed Sri.Renjith B. Marar as the Amicus Curiae.

(3.) Heard Sri.Akhil Vijay, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt.Rekha.S, learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent; Sri.A.Rajesh, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the 2nd respondent and also the learned Amicus.