Object and Purpose of Section 207 : Fair Trail vis-à-vis Article

21

The Apex Court in the case of Noor Khan vs. State of Rajasthan [AIR 1964 SC 286]
considered the similar provision of Section 207A(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code,
1898 and held that the said provision has been brought by way of an amendment to
enable the accused to obtain a clear picture of the case against(how can an accused be
expected to obtain a clear picture of the case against him in absence of any legal
supervision) him before commencement of the enquiry. The section imposes an
obligation upon the investigating officer to supply before the commencement of the
inquiry copies of the statements of the witnesses who are intended to be examined at
the trial so that the accused may utilise those statements for cross- examining the
witnesses to establish such defence as he desires to put up and also to seek their
testimony.

1. Tarun Tyagi v. CBI (2017)

Right to get such copies is statutorily recognised under S. 207 CrPC, which is the
hallmark of a fair trial, that every document relied upon by prosecution has to be
supplied to defence/accused at the time of supply of charge-sheet to enable such
accused to demonstrate that no case is made out against him and also to enable
him to prepare his cross-examination and defence strategy. [In order to prepara
defence strategies access to legal aid is imperitive]

2. Naresh Kumar Yadav vs Ravindra Kumar And Ors [(2008) 1 SCC 632]

para 23: The documents in terms of Sections 207 and 208 are supplied to make the
accused aware of the materials which are sought to be utilized against him. The object is
to enable the accused to defend himself properly. The idea behind the supply of copies
is to put him on notice of what he has to meet at the trial.

para 24: Further, it is baffling to note that the accused and informant referred to
particular positions of case diary. At the stage the bail applications were heard by the
High Court, legally they could not have been in a position to have access to the same.
The papers which are to be supplied to the accused have been statutorily prescribed.
The Courts should take serious note when the accused or the informant refers to the
case diary to buttress a stand.

3.  V.K.   Sasikala   v.  State [ 5 (2012)  9 SCC  771]

para 21: The question arising would no longer be one of compliance or noncompliance
with the provisions of Section 207 CrPC and would travel beyond the confines of the
strict language of the provisions of Cr.PC and touch upon the larger doctrine of a
free and fair trial that has been painstakingly built up by the courts on a
purposive interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution. The same has been affirmed
by this Hon’ble Court in Manjeet Singh Khera vs State Of Maharashtra[( 2013 9) SCC
276] paras 8-9

Independent legal opinion:

a) Choice argument: The accuse must have a choice

The second provisio to Section 207, CrPC permits the accused to exercise choice in case
of “voluminous” documents wherein he can inspect the concerned document “either
personally or through his pleader in Court”. Therefore, it is inherent in the language of the
section that there is a presumption that the accused may require the legal assistance of
his pleader in inspecting a document such as police paper and therefore the provisio
confers a choice on him to get the relevant documents such as police papers perused by
his Counsel.

b) The provision of Section 207 of the CrPC has been complied with in letter and
spirit.

Further, this Hon’ble court has reiterated in its judgements that Section 207 of CrPC is
premised on the principle of fair trial. This Court held that it was incumbent upon the
trial court to supply the copies of these documents to the accused as that entitlement
was a facet of just, fair and transparent investigation/trial and constituted an
inalienable attribute of the process of a fair trial which Article 21 of the Constitution
guarantees to every accused. The principle of fair trial demands that the accused should
be given a fair opportunity of present his case. It is relevant to mention that the accused
in a court of law is represented by his legal counsel. Therefore, an accused cannot be
said to be given notice of the materials which are sought to be utilized against him
when he is in custody and completely inaccessible to his legal counsel. Hence, it
necessarily flows that it would be unrealistic to presume that the accused, alone, could
understand the contents of the concerned documents albeit his legal counsel.

Inspection of police papers by the counsel of the accused before the stage
of Section 227

1. Gurbachan Singh vs State of Punjab [AIR 1957 SC 623]

The court while dealing with the issue of irregularity of trial vis-a-vis prior supply
copies of the statement recorded under Section 161, CrPC referred to the case of Willie
(William) Slaney v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and observed as follows:
Para 7: in case 'Willie (William) Slaney v. The State of Madhya Pradesh elaborately
discussed the question of the applicability of Section 537 and came to the conclusion
that in judging a question of prejudice, as of guilt, courts must act with a broad vision
and look to the substance and not to technicalities, and their main concern should be to
see whether the accused had a fair trial, whether he knew what he was being tried for,
whether the main facts sought to be established against him were explained to him
fairly and dearly and whether he was given a full and fair chance to defend himself. The
discussions are at pp. 1153, 1183 and 1189 (of S C R): (at pp. 122, 134-135 and 137 of A I
R)

Para 10: There is also the fact that before the amendment the accused had to request the Court
to refer to the statements made to the police officer and furnish him with a copy thereof in order
that the same may be used for contradicting the witness, but as it now stands, no such request is
necessary because there is, as will be shown later, a provision to the effect that copies should be
given earlier. Section 173 relates to the report of the police officer and Sub-section (4) is
practically a, new provision. There is also a new Sub-section (5) added. Sub-section (4) is to the
following effect :

"After forwarding a report under this section, the officer in charge of the police station
shall, before the commencement of the inquiry or trial, furnish or cause to be furnished
to the accused, free of cost, a copy of the report forwarded under Sub-section (1) and of
the first information report recorded under Section 154 and of all other documents or
relevant extracts thereof, on which the prosecution proposes to rely, including the
statements and confessions, if any, recorded under Section 164 and the statements
recorded under Sub-section (3) of Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution
proposes to examine as its witnesses."
It is clear from this new sub-section that when the police officer after completing the
investigation sends his report to the Magistrate, copies of the statements and
documents referred-to should be furnished to the accused. The object of this provision
is to put the accused on notice of what he has to meet at the time of the inquiry or trial.
The unamended Sub-section (4) had only laid down that a copy of the report forwarded
to the Magistrate, shall, on application, be furnished to the accused before the
commencement of the inquiry or trial. There was no compulsion to furnish him with
copies of the statements, documents etc.

2. The Superintendent And ... vs Anthony Alten Fletcher And Anr[1975 CriLJ
832] Calcutta HC – In the instant case the court noted the importance of
inspection by the counsel of the accused of the documents relied on by the
Prosecution before the stage of framing of charges.

Para 7: In pursuance of a commitment of the case, under Section 290, the Prosecutor shall
open his case by describing charges brought against the accused and stating by what
evidence he proposes to prove the guilt of the accused. Section 227 relates to discharge and
is as follows:

If, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and
after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge
considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall
discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing.

Section 228, which comes thereafter, relates to the framing of charges and pro-jrides under
Sub-section (1) that If, after such consideration and hearing as aforesaid, the Judge is of
opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence, he
shall frame in writing the charges against the accused subject to the provisions of Clauses (a)
and (b) thereafter.

The Order-sheet, brings to light that the date has been fixed for the framing of charges. If, at
this stage, the accused is not allowed an inspection of the record.-; and documents as referred
to under Section 209(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it would prejudice the defence
in making its submissions on behalf of the accused, denying thereby a valuable right to the
accused in a criminal trial.