Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. In Emperor v. Muthiah Swamiar, ILR 30 Mad 466, a decision of a Bench of this court, the question of granting copies of statements recorded under Section 164 Crl. P. C. came directly for consideration. The question came up for consideration before the learned Judges on a reference made by the Sessions Judge of Tiruchirapalli against the order of the Sub Magistrate who refused to grant copies ot statements recorded under Section 164 Crl. P. C. The Sub Magistrate relied on the decision in ILR 20 Mad 189 (FB), though that decision docs not relate to statements under Section 164 Crl. P. C. but only to reports under Sections 157, 168 and 173 Crl. P. C. The Sessions Judge thought that the Sub Magistrate was not justified in refusing copies of statements recorded under Section 164 Crl. P. C. He, therefore, made a reference under Section 438 Crl. P. C. The learned Judges who heard the reference referred to the decision in ILR 20 Mad 189 (FB), and observe as follows:

The observations which relate to Section 162 statements cannot apply to Section 164 statements. The learned Judges in ILR 30 Mad 466, seem to think that the question of granting copies under Section 164, Cr. P. C., cannot be determined merely with reference to their being public documents under Section 74 of the Evidence Act and the application by an interested person under Section 76 of the Act. It seems to me that in ILR 20 Mad 189 (FB), the right ot an accused to apply for public documents if they fall under Section 74 of the Evidence Act is recognised because he is a person interested in those documents.

An examination of the provisions of Ch. XIV of the Code shows that there is a ban on the use of statements recorded under Section 161(3) except for the purpose of contradiction of the prosecution witnesses. No such limit for the use is placed in regard to statements under Section 164, though such statements (except confessions) will not be substantive evidence. In both cases, their use can normally be only if and when the enquiry or trial begins. The statute fixes the stage at which the copies would fee given to the accused.

32. In ILR 30 Mad 466, the learned Judges, on A construction of the provisions of the Code, held that a person in remand could not get a copy of a statement made under Section 164, as the Code did not enable him to obtain it. That con; elusion was arrived at even when there was no provision in the Code like the present Section 173 (4). The introduction of the amendment specifically providing for the grant of copies, should, on the principle of the cases cited above, be held as impliedly taking away the right of the person under Section 76 of the Evidence Act. This would be in accord with the general scheme of Ch. XIV, Cr. P. C. It would therefore, follow that the accused would have no right to obtain copies of the statement under Section 164, Cr. P. C., before a charge-sheet is filed, notwithstanding Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act.