Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 621 (KER)

Rajmohan Pillai v. C. B. I.

2016-07-18

SUNIL THOMAS

body2016
ORDER : Sunil Thomas, J. 1. The second accused, who stands convicted for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 r/w 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and few provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, is the appellant. The interlocutory application is filed by the appellant. According to the appellant, Exts.P1 to P232, depositions of PWs.1 to PW99 and Exts.D1 to D28 which form part of the records of the Trial Court are not fully readable. For the proper conduct of the case, photocopies of the readable versions of the documents and depositions of witnesses are highly essential. Hence, it was prayed that the certified copies of Ext.P1 to P232, Exts.D1 to D28 marked by the defence and that of readable copies of the depositions of PWs.1 to PW99 and DW1 to DW3 may be issued to the petitioner. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is entitled for readable copies of the depositions and documents for effectively defending the accused. According to him, he would be prejudiced and remain handicapped, unless he is supplied with the certified copies of the readable copies of the depositions also. It was contended that without furnishing it, effective defending of the case will not be possible. The crucial question is whether the certified copies of the readable copies of the depositions can be given. 3. Chapter X of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala 1971 deals with certified copies. Rule 128(1) provides that any person entitled to obtain a copy of any proceeding or document filed in or in the custody of the Court may present an application. The application is to be made in Form No. 9, with certain particulars to be furnished. Rule 130 relates to copies of documents filed in Subordinate Courts. Rule 138 deals with copying charges and Rule 141 deals with transcription of copies. Evidently, the Rules are self contained, to regulate proceeding regarding the issuance of certified copies. 4. Reference to Rule 128(1) of the Rules clearly shows that a person is entitled to obtain "a copy of any proceeding or document filed in or in the custody of the Court". Hence, only a copy of the proceeding or a document filed in or in the custody of the Court alone can be issued. 4. Reference to Rule 128(1) of the Rules clearly shows that a person is entitled to obtain "a copy of any proceeding or document filed in or in the custody of the Court". Hence, only a copy of the proceeding or a document filed in or in the custody of the Court alone can be issued. It is clear that for issuing a certified copy, it must relate to the proceeding or a document filed in or in the custody of the Court. However, Rule 128(3) clarifies that the copies of Judges' minutes or of correspondence and other papers, not strictly judicial, will be granted only under orders of the Court. 5. One of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the readable copies of depositions form part of the judicial records, as they relate to judicial proceeding. Rule 261 of the Criminal Rules of Practise, Kerala 1982, applicable to all criminal courts in Kerala provides that the copies of depositions and other documents are to be submitted by the trial court to the appellate or revisional court. Readable copies of the trial court are prepared under Rule 262. It provides that when the Court is submitting the original records under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or for appeal, revision or reference, is shall submit readable copies of the depositions and statement of the accused and other documents, when the originals are not easily decipherable. These provisions come under the Chapter, "production, return and submission of records". Evidently, these documents are prepared by the section for the purpose of enabling the Appellate Court to have the advantage of reading, when the depositions are not easily decipherable. It is prepared after the proceedings in the trial court are over and when file is prepared for transmission to the Appellate Court. Evidently, these readable copies are not copies of a proceeding or a document filed in or in the custody of the Court and hence will not fall within the scope of Rule 128 of the High Court Rules. It is neither a part of the proceeding of the court below nor a document filed in or in the custody of the Court. Further, certified copies can be issued only in relation to those records or documents mentioned above and not of a copy of the original. 6. It is neither a part of the proceeding of the court below nor a document filed in or in the custody of the Court. Further, certified copies can be issued only in relation to those records or documents mentioned above and not of a copy of the original. 6. Learned counsel relied on Circular No.27/70 dated 06.08.1970 issued by this Court. It related to the preparation of legible copy of illegible depositions. It provided that the depositions of the witnesses and the statements of the accused persons recorded by some of the Presiding Officers were illegible and hence, Presiding Officers were impressed upon that it was essential to have a clear and legible deposition of the witness and statement of the accused persons. The circular directed that if the handwriting of any presiding officer was not easily readable, he will arrange for the preparation of clear legible copies of depositions and statements as soon as practicable, after they are recorded. The Presiding Officers were called upon to carefully scrutinise the copies and certify their correctness. It clearly stated that though these copies may be referred to, if necessary, certified copies must, of course, be prepared only from the original. Evidently, circular was issued only for the limited purpose of ensuring that the judicial officers who prepare the deposition copies ensure that the readable copies were prepared correctly and it were certified by the officer himself. The circular visualised a situation wherein if the readable copies of the documents and depositions are not forthwith prepared, it may be difficult for the section to prepare it, if in the meanwhile, the Judicial Officer demit his office. However, the legal position is clear that the certified copy is prepared only from the original. This is since the certified copy of a readable copy is not a direct copy of the deposition or the document, but is only a copy of a copy. Evidently, certified copy of the readable copy cannot be issued. 7. Rule 222 of the Criminal Rules of Practise is identical to Rule 128 of the High Court Rules. It deals with copy of application of documents and copy of proceeding or document filed in or in the custody of a Court. Rule 225 deals with the copies of non-judicial and confidential papers. 7. Rule 222 of the Criminal Rules of Practise is identical to Rule 128 of the High Court Rules. It deals with copy of application of documents and copy of proceeding or document filed in or in the custody of a Court. Rule 225 deals with the copies of non-judicial and confidential papers. It provides that the copies of the correspondence or of the proceeding which are confidential or are not strictly judicial shall not be granted, except under the orders of the Court. Rule 229 provides that notes of evidence of the Presiding Officer form only the record of the evidence and hence copies of such notes can be given. These Rules eminently show that certified copies of each and every part of the judicial file cannot be issued. The certified copy of the document can be issued only if it relates to a proceeding or is a document filed in or forming part of judicial record. 8. Learned counsel relying on the decision in New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Kunjumole (2012 (4) KLT 785) contended that this Court had reiterated the duty of Courts and Tribunals to issue certified legible copies. It was a case wherein the certified copy of the award issued by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was not a readable one. The Division Bench of this Court in that background held that it is the duty of the Tribunal to issue a legible certified copy. It was held that the litigants cannot be put to trouble by issuing illegible copies. It was not just and proper to direct the parties to go back to the Tribunal and get another legible certified copy of the judgment or award. The Bench also held that every party is entitled to read the judgment and the certified copy is issued not for the purpose of the appellate court alone, but also for the purpose of litigants. However, that does not mean that certified copy of legible copy prepared by the trial court under Rule 262 of the Civil Rules of Practise shall also be issued. This Court in Suseelan (Dr.) v. State of Kerala & Anr. (2014 (1) KLT Suppl.87 (Ker.) : 2013 (4) KHC 897) had dealt with a case wherein the scope of the above circular issued by this Court in 27/70 was also considered. This Court in Suseelan (Dr.) v. State of Kerala & Anr. (2014 (1) KLT Suppl.87 (Ker.) : 2013 (4) KHC 897) had dealt with a case wherein the scope of the above circular issued by this Court in 27/70 was also considered. However, that decision also reiterates that certified copies can be prepared only from the original. 9. However, recording of deposition illegibly will definitely cause prejudice to the parties and delay in proceeding. It is definitely the duty of the Judicial Officers to ensure that the deposition of the witnesses are taken down in a more legible manner. This is all the more so since in Kerala, the depositions of the witnesses are manually recorded. The concern of the learned counsel for the petitioner is fully justified. A conscious attempt of the Judicial Officers to avoid ambiguity in the recording of evidence is essential. The steps now taken to permit recording evidence on mechanical devices at the higher judiciary is likely to answer this issue to a larger extent. 10. Though, I am not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that certified copies of the readable copies and depositions are to be issued, the provisions of the Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules regarding inspection of records and search of records in accordance with Rules are well open to the litigants. Hence, it is held that the parties are not entitled for the certified copies of the legible copy of depositions prepared under Rule 262 of the Civil Rules of Practise. However, the parties will be entitled to the certified copies of the records subject to the provisions of the Rules. Hence, the Registry shall issue, on application and on usual terms, certified photocopies of the exhibits for which application is made. The application is disposed of accordingly.