The Court was considering a petition filed by a man (petitioner) who sought to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him on the ground that the trial against him was scheduled to start without complying with Rule 19(4).
He argued that his his right to defend his case fairly was, thus, violated.
Rule 19(4) mandates that before the commencement of a trial, the prosecution must provide the accused (a) statements of witnesses recorded during the investigation (b) a list of documents mentioned in Sections 173, 207, and 208 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and (b) material objects.
Notably, this includes both statements, and a list of documents and objects that the prosecution intends to rely upon during the trial, as well as a list of statements, documents and objects that were collected (during investigation) but are not being relied on by the prosecution during trial.
This rule ensures that the accused is fully informed of the evidence against them before the trial begins, thereby facilitating a fair trial process.
Summarising the law, the High Court observed:
“On a plain reading of Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982, it is clear that, the accused shall be supplied with statements of witnesses recorded and a list of documents, as mentioned in Sections 173, 207 and 208 of the Cr.P.C. In addition to that, every accused shall be supplied with a list of material objects which the Investigating Officer relies upon. The list also shall specify the statements, documents and materials that are not relied upon by the Investigating.”
In the present case, however, the Court found merit in the Public Prosecutor’s contention that this rule had been complied with and that the petitioner was only trying to protract the trial against him.
Source: Barandbench
