Accused Entitled Only to Relied-Upon Documents and List of Unrelied Evidence Under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

The Petitioner, a PhD student at JNU, was arrayed as an accused in FIR No. 59/2020 (Crime Branch) concerning a "larger conspiracy" behind the February 2020 Delhi riots.

Following the filing of the main chargesheet and four supplementary chargesheets, the Petitioner moved applications under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. seeking various electronic records, including full WhatsApp chat logs of police groups and other accused, un-redacted statements, and extensive CCTV footage from North-East Delhi.

The Trial Court (Special Judge) vide order dated 05.08.2023 dismissed the request for certain "unrelied" and sensitive documents, holding that relevant portions had already been supplied.

The Petitioner challenged this order via a Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution and Section 528/529 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C.).

1. Whether the prosecution is mandated under Section 207 Cr.P.C. to supply documents and electronic data that are not relied upon in the chargesheet but were collected during investigation.

2. Whether the non-supply of full WhatsApp chats of police officials and general CCTV footage of the riot area (beyond what is relied upon) violates the right to a fair trial.

The court primarily applied Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. (and Section 173), which mandates the supply of the police report and documents relied upon by the prosecution to the accused.

It relied on Siddharth Vashisth @ Manu Sharma v. State, which establishes that "fair disclosure" includes documents the prosecution intends to rely on, ensuring the constitutional mandate of a fair trial.

The court further applied the principle from P. Ponnuswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu and P. Gopalakrishnan @ Dileep v. State of Kerala, distinguishing between "relied upon" documents (which must be supplied) and "unrelied upon" documents (to which the accused may have a right of inspection, but not necessarily a right to receive copies at the Section 207 stage).

The Court observed that Section 207 Cr.P.C. creates a mandatory obligation to provide only those documents that form part of the chargesheet and are relied upon by the prosecution.

Regarding the Petitioner's demand for full WhatsApp chats of police groups, the Court noted these were "unrelied upon" and contained sensitive/privileged communications involving police activities, thus exempting them from mandatory disclosure.

The Court found that the Investigating Officer had already provided the relevant portions of chats and CCTV footage that directly pertained to the accusations against the Petitioner.

It reasoned that since investigation in related individual riot cases was ongoing, the blanket disclosure of all North-East Delhi CCTV footage was not required.

The Court distinguished between the right to receive copies (Section 207) and the right to seek a list of or inspect unrelied documents (Section 91/243), concluding that the Petitioner had already exercised the right of inspection where applicable.

The Court dismissed the Writ Petition, affirming the Special Judge’s order dated 05.08.2023.

The Court directed the trial to proceed with arguments on charge, noting that the investigation against the specific accused was complete.