B.A. Navas vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 1 September, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2667 of 2008()


1. B.A. NAVAS, S/O. ABDUL KAREEM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.K.SUNIL

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :01/09/2008

 O R D E R
                           V. RAMKUMAR, J.
                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                      Crl.R.P. No. 2667 of 2008
                 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                          Dated: 01-09-2008

                                ORDER

In this Revision filed by the first accused in Sessions Case No.

232 of 2006 pending before the Special Judge (SPE/CBI)-I/III, the

revision petitioner challenges the order dated 31-5-2008 passed by the

Special Judge refusing his application to direct the C.B.I. to furnish

copies of the statements of charge witness Nos. 1 to 79 recorded

under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. by the local police, namely Circle Inspector of

Police Kanjirappally and subsequently by the C.B.C.I.D., Kottayam.

2. The Court below accepted the objection raised by C.B.I.

and held that the accused is entitled to copies of the C.D. statements

of those witnesses only if the prosecution is relying on those

statements. The said stand taken by the C.B.I. and upheld by the

court below cannot be sustained. Whether the prosecution is relying

on the C.D. statements of those witnesses or not the prosecution is

bound to supply to the accused of the previous statements recorded

by the police under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. Of course, if the prosecution is

not examining any of those witnesses, then they are not bound to

give copies of the previous statements of those witnesses. I am

-:2:-

fortified in this connection by the decision of this Court in State of

Kerala v. Raghavan alias Maniyan – 1974 KLT 148 . May be the

C.B. has got a case that the investigation conducted by the earlier

agencies was not an honest investigation. That is a matter which

the C.B.I. will have to substantiate before the court below. In case

the prosecution is examining all the above witnesses it has to ensure

that the true copies of the previous statements recorded by the earlier

investigating agencies are also furnished to the accused well before

the examination of those witnesses. The impugned order is set aside

and the revision is allowed as above.

V. RAMKUMAR,
(JUDGE)

ani.