- (1.) APPLICANTS are facing trial in Sessions Trial No. 477 of 2012, (CBI Vs Dr. Rajesh Talwar and another), under Sections 302,34,201,203 IPC. During the course of trial an application was moved by the prosecution (CBI) seeking permission to place additional documents on record. Following documents were sought to be filed before the Court below:- (I) Seizure memo dated 13.9.2009 of Inspector Richhpal Singh and D.D. No. 7 dated 13.9.2009 of Inspector Rijpal Dabas, Inspector/ SOS, Crime Branch, sunlight Colony, New Delhi. (ii) Letter No. CDFD/LDFS/2011/2079 dated 24.3.2011 of CDFD on the subject DNA fingerprinting examination in Hemraj-Arushi Murder Case. (iii) Letter dated 8.9.2010 of SP Dehradun addressed to Shri Anil Sagar, Director (Scientist F) of CERT-In reply to this letter by CERT-in already filed in court. (iv) Letter No. CCH-163/2009/3135 dated 25.9.2009 along with Annexure, copy of CD already provided. (v) Report No. DFS-EE-2010-CF-43 dated 25.5.2010 Annexure (Page No. 1 to 291), Annexure -B (Page No. 1-208) Annexure C to J. Copy of four CD are also enclosed herewith. (vi) CDR, CAF and forwarding letter dated 18.11.2010 of TATA Tele Services in respect of mobile No. 9213515485 (page No. 1 to 5) (D- 94). (vii) Email dated 7.7.2008 of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. In respect of CDR of mobile Nos. 9999101094, 9899555999(Page no. 1 to 84) (D-95). (Viii) Email dated 20.7.2010 of SP, ACB, Dehradun, Nodal Officer, Airtel. Email dated 6.8.2010/28.7.2010 of Nodal Officer, Airtel (page No. 1 to 16) (D-92). (ix) Letter dated 8.8.2008 of Bharti Airtel Ltd along with CDRs in respect of mobile Nos. 9810520630, 9871625746, 9810037926, 9810669540 and 9810509911 (page No. 72 to 222) (D--93). (x) Report dated 22.6.2010 on the subject scrutiny of Orkut Profile (Page No. 1 to 71).
(2.) IT is further stated in the application that this issue was raised by the CBI before the Special Leave Petition filed in the Apex Court that it was typographical error in describing the exhibits by the CDFD Hyderabad. This letter also forms part of the counter affidavit filed by CBI in the Hon'ble Apex Court in the present case. This letter is now required to be exhibited in the court. It is contended by learned counsel for the CBI that the aforesaid documents were collected during the investigation and forms part of the report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C.. These documents need to be exhibited in their original form.
(3.) THE objection to the said application was filed by the accused. It is contended that as many as fifteen prosecution witnesses stand examined and cross examined and filing of the said documents at this stage would prejudice the accused. The said documents are intended to be filed for filling up the lacuna that exists in the prosecution story. It is further averred that these documents were never part of the report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. more particularly, letter No. CDFD/LDFS/2011/2079 dated 24.3.2011. Prosecution cannot be permitted to file documents which are not part of the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.;