Investigation in a case involving disproportionate assets mandates thorough examination of documents: Delhi HC allows CBI’s petition seeking certified copies of documents
Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar [30-01-2024]

Read Order: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v. STATE [DEL HC- W.P.(CRL) 623/2023]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, February 2, 2024: While observing that the acquisition of documents directly from the court records is essential for ensuring the highest level of authenticity in legal proceedings, the Delhi High Court has allowed a writ petition filed against the order of Special Judge whereby the application filed by the CBI seeking certified copies of the documents was dismissed.

It was the case of the petitioner-CBI that once the documents seized by the Investigating Officer in one case have been forwarded to the Court, such documents are considered to be in the custody of the Court and permission of the Court where the said documents are lying is required for taking over such documents in another case for investigation purpose. He further submitted that files in question were concerned with videography of the scene of the crime. Referring to Rule 14.16 of the CBI (Crime) Manual, 2005 (now Rule 9.9 of the CBI (Crime) Manual, 2020), the SPP also submitted that it is a mandate that search proceedings should also be videographed in order to enable the Court to appreciate the evidence collected by CBI.

It was further submitted that the present FIR involved the issue of disproportionate assets which required various details such as verified movable and immovable assets, value of assets based on purchase price etc. The SPP also argued that the investigation in a case involving disproportionate assets mandates the thorough examination of documents and the documents so sought by Petitioner-CBI forms the bed rock and foundation for the investigation.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar opined that through the impugned order, the Trial Court had taken the view that CBI official during the course of the proceedings had copied the court CD in their official laptop and had observed that it would not be appropriate to de-seal a material document in connection with other case. Trial Court had further observed that the CBI was already in possession of the complete set of documents.

“In my opinion, the acquisition of documents directly from the court records is essential for ensuring the highest level of authenticity in legal proceedings. Such an approach guarantees an unimpeachable source of documentation, thereby mitigating any potential prejudice that may arise in the case of either party. Certainly, obtaining documents from the court records not only upholds the integrity of the legal process but also ensures a fair and impartial adjudication, free from any undue influence or bias”, the Bench highlighted.

The Bench also affirmed CBI’s submission that the Bureau probe rests upon the foundation of the documents that the petitioner-CBI is seeking and obtaining those documents through a legitimate process cannot be questioned at any stage, as all the required documents form the part of Court record.

“It is also pertinent to note here that investigation in a case involving disproportionate assets mandates the thorough examination of documents as per the CBI manual referred by the learned SPP”, the Bench further added.

Therefore, allowing the writ petition, the Bench directed the concerned Trial Court to supply the documents mentioned in "ANNEXURE-E". The petitioner-CBI was also given the liberty to prepare an investigation copy from the Court Compact Disc dealing with the requested files 0.53 DAV and 0.55 DAV.