STATE OF MADRAS Vs. G KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by the Public Prosecutor. Madras, to revise the order of the Town Sub Magistrate, City I, Coimbatore. The respondent and some others have been arrested in connection with counterfeiting currency notes and they have been remanded to custody. The investigation is not yet complete and the charge-sheet has not yet been filed. In the course of the investigation statements have been recorded under Section 164 Crl. P. C. The respondent applied for copies of these statements. The magistrate has directed copies of those statements to be granted to the respondent. Against this order directing the grant of copies to the respondent, the present revision has been filed by the Public Prosecutor. The contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that these copies are not to be granted at this stage, that is, before the filing of the charge-sheet. He had also contended that even after the filing of the charge-sheet, copies of those statements should not be granted unless they form part of the record though in the objection filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, C. I. D., Sri R. M. Krishnaswami, he has stated that the accused are entitled to such copies only after the charge-sheet is filed.

(2.) The question for consideration before me now is whether copies of the statements under Section 164 Crl. P. C. can be granted at this stage, that is, before the filing of the charge sheet.

(3.) That these documents fall under Section 74(1)(iii) of the Evidence Act seems to me to be clear. The other question is whether the accused has a right to inspect and demand a copy of the same on payment of the usual charges. On the question as to who is a person who has a right to inspect the public document mentioned in Section 74 of the Evidence Act, there is no indication in the Evidence Act. In the Criminal Procedure Code also, there is no indication. The Criminal procedure Code does not deal with the public documents as such and so the question as to who has a right to inspect such a document and demand a copy is not dealt with therein. The question has therefore to be decided on the case law on the subject.