SAURAV DAS versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. on 20 January 2023

1. By way of this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution ofIndia the petitioner has prayed for appropriate directions/orders directingthe respondents - States to enable free public access to chargesheetsand final reports filed as per Section 173 of the Code of CriminalProcedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C’) in furtherance ofthe rationale as established by this Court in Youth Bar Association ofIndia v. Union of India, (2016) 9 SCC 473 on their websites.

2. Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe petitioner has heavily relied upon the decision of this Court in thecase of Youth Bar Association of India (supra) by which this Courtdirected copies of FIRs to be published within 24 hours of their registrationon the police websites or on the websites of the State Governments.

2.1 It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that while the directionof this Hon’ble Court directing the police to publish copies of FIRs ontheir websites has indeed induced transparency in the working of thecriminal justice system, the logic of disclosure applies more strongly tochargesheets, for while FIRs are based on unsubstantiated allegations,chargesheets are filed after due investigation.

2.2 Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel appearing on behalfof the petitioner has taken us to the Scheme of the Code of CriminalProcedure more particularly Sections 207, 173(4) and 173(5) of the Cr.P.Cand relying upon the said provisions it is vehemently submitted that asper the aforesaid provisions when a duty is cast upon the InvestigatingAgency to furnish the copy of the challans/charge-sheets along with allother documents to the accused, the same also should be in the publicdomain to have the transparency in the working of the Criminal JusticeSystem.

2.3 Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel appearing on behalfof the petitioner has also vehemently submitted that the chargesheet is apublic document once filed in the Court. Reliance is placed on Sections74 and 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It is submitted that evenunder Section 4(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafterreferred to as the ‘RTI Act’) a duty is cast upon the public officer/publicauthority to provide as much information suo moto to the public at regular A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Aintervals through various means of communications and to provide asmuch information as mentioned in Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act.

Making the above submissions, it is prayed to grant the relief assought in the present petition.

3. We have heard Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counselBappearing on behalf of the petitioner at length.

4. At the outset, it is required to be noted that by way of presentwrit petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the petitionerby way of Public Interest Litigation has prayed for an appropriatedirection/order directing all the States in the country to enable free publicCaccess to chargesheets and final reports filed as per Section 173 of theCr.P.C. on their websites.

4.1For the aforesaid heavy reliance is placed on the decisionof this Court in the case of Youth Bar Association of India (supra).On going through the decision of this Court in the case of Youth BarDAssociation of India (supra), the reliance placed upon the same bythe counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner for the relief sought inthe present petition is thoroughly misconceived and misplaced. In theaforesaid decision this Court directed that the copies of the FIRs shouldbe published within 24 hours of their registrations on the police websitesEor on the websites of the State Government. From the entire judgment itappears that this Court directed the copies of the FIRs to be publishedwithin 24 hours on the police websites or on the websites of the StateGovernment. Looking to the interest of the accused and so that theinnocent accused are not harassed and they are able to get the relieffrom the competent court and they are not taken by surprise. Therefore,Fthe directions issued by this Court are in favour of the accused, whichcannot be stretch to the public at large so far as the chargesheets areconcerned.

4.2Even the relief which is sought in the present writ petitiondirecting that all the challans/chargesheets filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C.Gshall be put on public domain/websites of the State Governments shallbe contrary to the Scheme of the Criminal Procedure Code. As perSection 207 Cr.P.C. a duty is cast upon the Investigating Officer to supplyto the accused the copy of the police report and other documents includingthe First Information Report recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C. andthe statements recorded under sub-Section (3) of Section 161 Cr.P.C.H

4.3As per sub-Section 173(4) Cr.P.C. a duty is cast upon theInvestigating Agency to furnish or cause to be furnished to the accused,free of cost, a copy of the report forwarded under sub-section (1) underSection 173. Section 173(4) reads as under:

“173(4). After forwarding a report under this section,the officer in charge of the police station shall, beforethe commencement of the inquiry or trial, furnish or causeto be furnished to the accused, free of cost, a copy ofthe report forwarded under sub-section (1) and of thefirst information report recorded under section 154 andof all 41 other documents or relevant extracts thereof,on which the prosecution proposes to rely, including thestatements and confessions, if any, recorded undersection 164 and the statements recorded under sub-section (3) of section 161 of all the persons whom theprosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.”

4.4As per Section 173(5) Cr.P.C. when any report is filed inrespect of the case to which Section 170 Cr.P.C. applies, the policeofficer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report all documentsor relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to relyother than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation.

4.5Therefore on conjoint reading of Section 173 Cr.P.C. andSection 207 Cr.P.C. the Investigating Agency is required to furnish thecopies of the report along with the relevant documents to be relied uponby the prosecution to the accused and to none others. Therefore, if therelief as prayed in the present petition is allowed and all the chargesheetsand relevant documents produced along with the chargesheets are puton the public domain or on the websites of the State Governments it willbe contrary to the Scheme of the Criminal Procedure Code and it mayas such violate the rights of the accused as well as the victim and/oreven the investigating agency. Putting the FIR on the website cannot beequated with putting the chargesheets along with the relevant documentson the public domain and on the websites of the State Governments.

5. Now so far as the reliance placed upon on Sections 74 & 76 ofthe Evidence Act is concerned, the reliance placed upon the said provisionsare also absolutely misconceived and misplaced. Documents mentionedin Section 74 of the Evidence Act only can be said to be public documents, A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Athe certified copies of which are to be given by the concerned policeofficer having the custody of such a public document. Copy of thechargesheet along with the necessary documents cannot be said to bepublic documents within the definition of Public Documents as per Section74 of the Evidence Act. As per Section 75 of the Evidence Act all otherdocuments other than the documents mentioned in Section 74 of theBEvidence Act are all private documents. Therefore, the chargesheet/documents along with the chargesheet cannot be said to be publicdocuments under Section 74 of the Evidence Act, reliance placed uponSections 74 & 76 of the Evidence Act is absolutely misplaced.

6. Now so far as the reliance placed upon Section 4 of the RTICAct is concerned, under Section 4(2) of the RTI Act a duty is cast uponthe public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements ofclause (b) of sub- Section 1 of Section 4 of the RTI Act to provide asmuch information suo moto to the public at regular intervals throughvarious means of communications. Copies of the chargesheet and theDrelevant documents along with the charge-sheet do not fall within Section4(1)(b) of the RTI Act. Under the circumstances also the reliance placedupon Section 4(1)(2) of the RTI Act is also misconceived and misplaced.

7. In view of the above and for the reason stated above, thepetitioner is not entitled to the relief as prayed in the present petitionEnamely directing all the States to put on their websites the copies of allthe chargesheets/challans filed under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C.

Present writ petition lacks merits and the same deserves to bedismissed and is accordingly dismissed.

FNidhi Jain

(Assisted by : Abhishek Agnihotri, LCRA)

Writ Petition dismissed.

G

H