PUSHPA SAXENA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A trial is pending for charges under sections 354, 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. The allegation is that a young girl who is also a neighbour was called to the house of the petitioner No. 2. His wife was present there. Another person was also present. She was undressed and acts have been attributed to the present petitioners and another which, according to the prosecution, fell within the mischief of aforementioned penal provisions. The photographs of the complainants were also taken.

(2.) THE petitioners submit that the copy of the photographs be also made available to the petitioners. For this, reliance is being placed on section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974. According to the petitioners, all documents on which the prosecution relies are to be made available to the accused. He submits that if these are not made available then the trial would be vitiated.

(3.) THE Supreme Court of India in a recent decision in the State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh and others, 1996(1) Recent Criminal Report 533 (Criminal Appeal No. 616 of 1985, decided on 1.1.1996) has observed that trial of rape cases should be held cases in camera should be the rule and an open trial in such cases an exception.