Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi, Jan 20: The Supreme Court on Friday held that police and investigating agencies like CBI, ED etc., cannot be directed to upload the chargesheets filed in cases in a public platform for easy access by the general public.
A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar held so while dismissing a PIL filed by RTI activist and investigative journalist Saurav Das. The bench termed as ‘misplaced’ the reliance made by Advocate Prashant Bhushan on the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Youth Bar Association Case in which directions were issued to the police to upload the FIRs in website within 24 hours except in sensitive cases like rape and sexual offences.
The Court held that the direction in the Youth Bar Association case cannot be extended to chargesheets. The FIRs were directed to be publicly uploaded so that the innocent accused are not harassed and they are able to get the relief from the competent court and are not taken by surprise. This direction cannot be stretched to the public at large so far as the charge sheets are concerned.
Direction to upload chargesheets will be contrary to scheme of CrPC
The Court further held that the direction sought to put all chargesheets in the public domain is contrary to the scheme of the CrPC.
“It may as such, violate the rights of the accused as well as the victim and/or even the investigation agency. Putting the FIR on the website cannot be equated with putting the charge sheets on public”, the bench noted in the order.
Reliance on Section 74 and 76 of Evidence Act misconceived
The petitioner had argued that a charge-sheet, not unlike an FIR, was a ‘public document’, since the filing of a charge-sheet was an act of a public official in discharge of their official duties and as such, came under the definitional ambit of ‘public document’ given in Section 74 of the Evidence Act, 1872. Therefore, a charge-sheet filed by a police department, or an investigative agency, Bhushan claimed, would be subject to the discipline of Section 76 of the Act that mandated public disclosure of any public document by a public officer having custody of such document to a person having a ‘right to inspect’.
The Court rejected these arguments as misconceived
“Documents mentioned in S.74 of Evidence Act only can be said to be public documents, certified copies of which are to be given by the concerned public authority having the custody of such a public document. Copy of charge sheets along with necessary public documents cannot be said to be public documents u/s 74 of the Evidence Act”.
The judgment is yet to be uploaded.
