Gujarat High Court
Central Bureau Of Investigation ... vs Deepak Anilkumar Raval(Original A-2) on 6 September, 2021
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
R/SCR.A/5179/2019 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5179 of 2019
==========================================================
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH SURESH BALARAM
NAIR
Versus
DEEPAK ANILKUMAR RAVAL(ORIGINAL A-2) & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RC KODEKAR(1395) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. ASIM PANDYA, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR SHIRISH R PATEL(5605)
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. PRANAV TRIVEDI, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 06/09/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. The prayer by CBI is to quash and set aside the order dated 21.8.2017 passed by learned Special Judge, CBI Court No.8, Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No. 03/2008.
2. The respondent No.1 has made the prayer to direct the prosecution to submit the entire prosecution papers along with its log details or the original generated day, date, month and year with its volume in nature with the declaration that they have generated the entire prosecution records into their office computers or their devices.
3. Mr. R. C. Kodekar, learned counsel for the CBI states that the learned Judge while allowing the application has failed to take into consideration the provisions of Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. The direction to supply log details and the original day, Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 07 22:34:22 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/5179/2019 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2021 date, month and year of generation and along with declaration, as prayed by, is bad in law. Mr. Kodekar, submits that CBI has provided all the relevant documents to the accused and prayer for providing day, date, month and year along with declaration of generation of the documents, as alleged, would also further be hit by provision of Section 65-A and 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, which is mandatory in nature. Relying on the provisions of Section 207 of Cr.P.C., Mr. Kodekar submitted that the accused is entitled for the documents of charge-sheet in accordance with provisions of Section 207 whereupon the prosecution places his reliance and submitted that the prayer for log details and generation of day, date, month and year is something which is unfathomable and is not consistent with Section 207 of Cr.P.C.
4. In response to the arguments, Mr. Asim Pandya, learned Senior Counsel submitted that they have no quarrel for provision of Section 207 of Cr.P.C and further at present they do not want to go into larger provisions of Section 91 of Cr.P.C. Mr. Pandya, submits that accused would have all the opportunity to go by the provisions of Section 91 of Cr.P.C. for production of relevant documents, as may be necessary during the course of trial and, therefore, the accused would always invoke the provision of Section 91 of Cr.P.C., as and when legally advised.
5. Thus, on the submissions made by both the sides, the order dated 21.8.2017 is set aside with a liberty which the accused would all the times have, in accordance with the provisions of Cr.P.C. to invoke the provision of Section 91 of Cr.P.C.
Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 07 22:34:22 IST 2021R/SCR.A/5179/2019 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2021
6. Taking into consideration the length of the date of registration of FIR being 25.6.2007, it is very much necessary to expedite the trial. Thus, it is directed to learned trial Judge to expeditiously take up the matter and to conclude the trial preferably within 6 months.
(GITA GOPI,J) SAJ GEORGE Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 07 22:34:22 IST 2021