Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Directorate Of Enforcement vs Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal on 27 September, 2022

Author: Anu Malhotra

Bench: Anu Malhotra

                      $~52
                      *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                      +      CRL.M.C. 657/2022 & CRL.M.A. 19865/2022
                             DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT                           ..... Petitioner
                                                Through:      Mr. Anupam S Sharrma, Special
                                                              Counsel with Mr. Prakarsh Airan &
                                                              Ms. Harpreet Kalsi, Advocates.
                                                versus
                             RAJESH KUMAR AGGARWAL                                ..... Respondent
                                                Through:      Mr. Hardik Sharma & Mr. Mukul
                                                              Malik, Advocates.
                             CORAM:
                             HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
                                                ORDER

% 27.09.2022 CRL.M.A. 19865/2022 in CRL.M.C. 657/2022 The matter is already fixed for the date 18.11.2022 with CRL.M.C.447/2022 and is now taken up on CRL.M.A. 19865/2022 filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking a stay of the operation of the impugned order dated 15.11.2021 of the learned Trial Court. It is inter alia submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the matter is fixed before the learned Trial Court for tomorrow.

Reliance is placed on behalf of the petitioner on the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 11 in Suo Moto Writ (CRL) No.(S) 1/2017, a verdict dated 20.04.2021, wherein, it has been directed to the effect:-

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.09.2022 17:35:09 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.

"11. The amici pointed out that at the commencement of trial, accused are only turnished with list of documents and statements which the prosecution relies on and are kept in the dark about other material, which the police or the prosecution may have in their possession, which may be exculpatory in nature, or absolve or help the accused. This court is of the opinion that while furnishing the list of statements, documents and material objects under Sections 207/208, Cr. PC, the magistrate should also ensure that a list of other materials, (such as statements, or objects/documents seized, but not relied on should be furnished to the accused. This is to ensure that in case the accused is of the view that such materials are necessary to be produced for a proper and just trial, she or he may seek appropriate orders, under the Cr. PC. for their production during the trial, in the interests of justice. It is directed accordingly; the draft rules have been accordingly modified. [Rule 4(1)]."

Vide the impugned order dated 15.11.2021 on an application filed by A-8 named Rajesh Aggarwal seeking supply of copies of documents which have not been placed on the record and supplied to the accused i.e. un-relied upon documents, though, inadvertently mentioned as relied upon documents in the application. The said application filed by A-8 was allowed by the learned Trial Court and the complainant was directed to supply to the accused the copies of all un-relied documents of the case lying in the possession of the Investigating Officer or Malkhana record, proof of DOE along with list of the documents inter alia placing reliance on the verdict in Crl. Rev. Petition No.1338/2021 in case of "CBI Vs. INX Media Pvt. Ltd. & ors.".

On behalf of the petitioner, it has been submitted that in terms of the CRL.M.C. 657/2022 Page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.09.2022 17:35:09 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.

directions in paragraph 11 of the verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ (CRL) No.(S) 1/2017 (supra) which is reproduced elsewhere hereinabove, it is only the list of the documents even not relied upon by the Investigating Agency, which has to be supplied to the accused and not the documents not relied upon.

The said submission is refuted on behalf of the respondent. Vide directions in the said Suo Moto Writ (CRL) No.(S) 1/2017 (supra), all High Courts of the country have been directed to modify the practice directions and rules. As observed in "CBI Vs. INX Media Pvt. Ltd. & ors." 2021 SCC OnLine Delhi 4392, it is indicated that the said rules as observed in paragraph 11 of the said verdict have not been notified yet.

Before proceeding further, the Registry is directed to put up in a sealed cover the modified draft rules of this Court framed by the Committee of which the undersigned was also a member for the next date of hearing.

Till the next date of hearing, the operation of the impugned order of the learned Trial Court is stayed to the extent of supply of un-relied documents not relied upon on behalf of the petitioner but the list of the un- relied documents in the case has to be supplied by the petitioner to the respondent without default.

The matter is directed to be re-notified for the date 13.10.2022. Copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial Court concerned by the Registry.

ANU MALHOTRA, J SEPTEMBER 27, 2022/nc CRL.M.C. 657/2022 Page 3 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.09.2022 17:35:09 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.