KANAKKUMAR PRANTILAL NANAVATI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short question that arises in this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is whether the complainant/informant in a criminal case is entitled to get copies of the relevant papers and documents, and particularly statements recorded by the police officers under Sec. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for the purpose of availing of an opportunity of making submissions in respect of final report submitted by the Investigating Officer seeking "C" summary ?

(2.) That short question arises in the backdrop of the following circumstances. The petitioner lodged a complaint against Swami Amar Jyoti Shyam and others for the offences punishable under Secs. 365, 366, 368, 384 read with Sec. 120B of the Indian Penal Code in Navrangpura police station. The said complaint came to be lodged as Cr. No. I 934 of 1987. The CID branch had taken over the investigation of the said offence on November 12, 1987. On completion of the investigation, a final report was submitted seeking for "C" summary on December 15, 1988. The complainant applied for the certified copy of the said final report and the same was furnished to him on January 5, 1989. It appears that the petitioner was issued notice by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate to show cause why the "C" summary as prayed for by the police should not be granted. The Investigating Officer also forwarded all the papers alongwith the index showing Exhs. 1 to 257 in the Court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad.

(3.) By the application dated January 13, 1989 the complainant applied for copies of the statements of the witnesses recorded by the police under Sec 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the case of the investigation of the offences. The complainant submitted that in absence of the inquiry papers of the police, no proper submissions can be made by him. The complainant also pointed out Clause 377 of the Criminal Manual providing supply of such copies. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad by his order dated January 27, 1989 rejected the above application of the complainant for the copies of the documents holding that the demand of the complainant was improper and illegal. The petitioner complainant has therefore, approached this Court by way of the present petition assailing the aforesaid order of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad.