### Challenging the admissibility and authentication of foreign documents is to be adjudicated at the evidence stage.

The Income Tax Department (Respondent No. 2) filed multiple complaints against the Petitioner under Sections 276C(1) and 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and Section 191 of the IPC, alleging undisclosed foreign assets in British Virgin Islands (BVI) entities.

The Petitioner filed applications before the Trial Court seeking the production and inspection of original, authenticated documents, contending that the documents supplied were unauthenticated photocopies.

The Ld. ACMM dismissed the applications on 24.10.2019, labeling them "premature" and stating that admissibility would be determined at the evidence stage.

During the pendency of these Petitions, the Trial Court on 05.12.2024 allowed an application by the Respondent to place the original/authenticated documents on record.

Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the production and inspection of original/authenticated foreign documents at the pre-charge stage.

Whether the subsequent production of original documents by the Respondent renders the current challenge infructuous.

The court's reasoning was grounded in Section 78(6) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which mandates that public documents of a foreign country must be proved by the original or a certified copy bearing a certificate from a Notary Public or Indian diplomatic agent.

It also considered Section 279B of the Income Tax Act, regarding the admissibility of documents in the custody of Income Tax authorities.

The court referenced *Jain Engineering Co. v. Enforcement Directorate*, affirming that foreign documents require proper authentication.

The court referenced *Poonam Jain v. Union of India*, which emphasizes the accused’s fundamental right to be supplied with all material relied upon to ensure a fair trial.

The Court observed that the Petitioner’s primary grievance—the non-production of original documents—was effectively resolved by the subsequent development where the Trial Court allowed the Respondent to place original/authenticated versions on record on 05.12.2024.

The Court noted that while questions of admissibility and the method of proof (under Section 78(6) of the Evidence Act) are generally adjudicated during the evidence stage, the right of the accused to inspect the material is a cornerstone of a fair trial.

Since the documents are now part of the judicial record, the Petitioner’s right to inspection is governed by standard District Court rules.

The Court further clarified that the Petitioner retains the right to challenge the genuineness and mode of proof of these documents during cross-examination.

The Petitions were disposed of with the direction that the Petitioner is at liberty to raise all legal objections regarding admissibility and authentication at the appropriate stage of the trial and may inspect the newly filed documents in accordance with court rules.