SC Clarifies Accused Can Inspect and Seek Unrelied Investigation Documents

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has ruled that an accused can inspect documents seized during an investigation but not relied upon by the prosecution and can later seek specific documents to be produced before witnesses if they are relevant to the defence.

A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran held that an accused is entitled to access material available with the prosecution agency to prepare a defence, while clarifying that the timing of production would depend on the document’s nature and relevance.

The ruling came in a case involving an alleged conspiracy between 2010 and 2014 to award consultancy work for the permanent campus of the Central University of Jharkhand in Ranchi using allegedly fake documents, causing a loss of nearly ₹1.92 crore.

The CBI had challenged orders directing it to produce documents sought by accused Anil Dixit under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including material seized during the probe but not cited in the chargesheet.

The agency argued that the unrallied material was voluminous and offered inspection instead. The Supreme Court accepted the arrangement but made clear that inspection would not end the accused’s right to seek relevant documents.

The court said the accused could examine the material and identify specific documents required when the relevant witness is being examined by the prosecution or defence.

The CBI was directed to keep the files ready during the trial. Alternatively, the accused or an authorised representative could identify required documents during inspection, which would then be recorded in writing, signed by both sides and produced before the trial court without delay.

The court also said that if relevant documents were not available with the CBI, the accused could procure and prove them during defence proceedings, including through the RTI Act or by examining an appropriate witness. Their evidentiary value would ultimately be decided by the trial court.

However, the bench excluded protected material such as source information and certain registers, noting that the accused had clarified that he was not seeking case diaries or information about sources.

Wider Legal Significance

The ruling addresses a recurring question in criminal trials: what happens to material collected during investigation but deliberately not relied upon by the prosecution?

The Supreme Court has previously dealt with the issue in cases including VK Sasikala vs State, Manoj vs State of Madhya Pradesh and Sarla Gupta vs Directorate of Enforcement. The courts have examined the accused’s right to access potentially exculpatory material while balancing investigative confidentiality and procedural safeguards.

The issue also remains significant in the Delhi riots conspiracy case involving Devangana Kalita, where access to unrelied material, including CCTV footage and WhatsApp communications, has been contested.

The latest ruling makes one point clear: inspection of unrelied material is not merely a formality. If an accused identifies a document relevant to the defence, they can seek its production at the appropriate stage of the trial, including during witness examination.

The final determination of its relevance and evidentiary value, however, remains with the trial court