- (1.) BY the Court. - Before proceeding in the matter, the order passed on 6.10.2012 needs to be recorded herein below : "Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that all these petitioners are being prosecuted in RC N. 48 -A of 1996. When the police papers along with the documents were submitted to the Court, an application was filed on behalf of the accused persons to direct the CBI to furnish all those documents so that they may file petition for discharge. On filing such petition, objection was taken by the CBI that the documents are quite voluminous which run into 56000 pages and hence, it would not be possible for the CBI to furnish those documents to the accused persons. On taking such objection, an order was passed on 27.2.2004 whereby prosecution was directed to furnish copies of every document which the CBI would be intending to adduce evidence to those accused persons which is related to them. However, in the same order, it was also recorded that the matter be posted on the next date for inspection of the documents. Since all the documents were not ordered to be furnished the accused person filed Cr. M.P. No. 324 of 2004, the application was dismissed after holding that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. Thereupon, the trial proceeded with. When the trial proceeded with, another application was filed for directing the CBI to furnish the documents, upon which it will be placing reliance. On filing such application, the CBI made statement before the Court that the prosecution is very much aware of the order regarding furnishing of the documents to the accused persons which is related to them before adducing the same. However, when the documents were not furnished, another application was filed by the accused persons. Rejoinder to that application was filed by the CBI wherein in paragraphs 2 and 3 following statements were made : "In reply to this paragraph, it is submitted that part IOs have been recommended for issuance of summons. It is because they will be proving their investigations only. The witnesses who have been examined by them will be proving the documents and circumstances leading to the facts. At present, there is no requirement of supply of contingent bills enclosing suppliers' bills to them. The Xerox copies of the contingent bills will be supplied to the concerned accused persons at an appropriate time. So, they need not to worry. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the examination of part loss may not be adjourned."
(2.) IN stead of furnishing documents as committed by the CBI, an application was filed by the CBI on 1.9.2012 wherein prayer was made to allow them to furnish DVD so that accused persons by watching DVD may inspect the documents, upon which CBI would be placing reliance. That prayer was allowed. Being aggrieved with that, this application has been filed.
(3.) MR . Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in spite of repeated statement being made on behalf of the CBI that at the relevant point of time, documents would be furnished, the documents were never furnished. In stead of furnishing documents the CBI has now come forward with a plea that DVD would be supplied which is foreign to the relevant provision of the Code of therefore, the order is quite illegal.;