Bar and Bench: New Delhi: Thursday, 20 February 2025.
The Court allowed a plea by Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru who sought certain documents in connection with the POCSO trial against him.
The Karnataka High Court
recently observed that a person accused of a crime should not be driven to file
an application under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) to secure documents
he is entitled to under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to
support his defence during a criminal trial [Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru
v. State of Karnataka].
Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation while allowing a plea by Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru, the pontiff of the Jagadguru Murugarajendra Vidyapeetha Mutt in Chitradurga.
The pontiff had sought certain documents from the Cottonpet police in connection with an ongoing sexual harassment trial against him.
Sharanaru had cited Section 91 of the CrPC to seek these documents.
The documents sought included the Station House Dairy from Cottonpet Police Station for a certain period in 2022, the duty roster for the month of July 2022, a notebook of Patrolling Police Constable Dhananjaya and ASI Prakash, among other documents.
However, a trial court rejected his Section 91 CrPC plea, after noting the prosecution's objection that the accused pontiff could secure these documents by filing an RTI application.
This prompted Sharanaru to approach the High Court.
On February 13, the High Court disagreed with the trial court's approach, terming it illegal.
Justice Nagaprasanna observed that it is not appropriate to force an accused to resort to the RTI Act for documents he is entitled to get under Section 91 of the CrPC.
"The rejection of which is on the face of it illegal as that is not the purport of Section 91 of the CrPC that an accused should be driven for securing documents under the Right to Information Act when an application is filed under Section 91 of CrPC," the High Court said.
The High Court, therefore,
set aside the trial court's earlier decision on this aspect and allowed the
accused pontiff's Section 91 CrPC plea.
"The prosecution shall place on record the documents that are sought by the petitioner at the appropriate stage in the trial," the High Court ordered
Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru was booked in a criminal case in 2022 on allegations that he was involved in the abuse of two minor girls residing at a hostel run by the Jagadguru Murugarajendra Vidyapeetha Mutt.
The alleged offences were committed against minor girl students of Priyadarshini School, who were staying in Akkamahadevi Vasathi Nilaya, a hostel run by the Mutt.
It is alleged that a girl aged about 16 years was sexually harassed for around three and half years and that another minor girl aged about 15 years was sexually harassed for around one and half years by the accused (Sharanaru and four others).
The charges include those under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The criminal trial in this case is presently ongoing before an Additional District And Sessions Judge in Chitradurga.
Advocate BK Swamy appeared for Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru.
Additional Special Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesha appeared for the State.
[Read Order]
The Court allowed a plea by Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru who sought certain documents in connection with the POCSO trial against him.
Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation while allowing a plea by Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru, the pontiff of the Jagadguru Murugarajendra Vidyapeetha Mutt in Chitradurga.
The pontiff had sought certain documents from the Cottonpet police in connection with an ongoing sexual harassment trial against him.
Sharanaru had cited Section 91 of the CrPC to seek these documents.
The documents sought included the Station House Dairy from Cottonpet Police Station for a certain period in 2022, the duty roster for the month of July 2022, a notebook of Patrolling Police Constable Dhananjaya and ASI Prakash, among other documents.
However, a trial court rejected his Section 91 CrPC plea, after noting the prosecution's objection that the accused pontiff could secure these documents by filing an RTI application.
This prompted Sharanaru to approach the High Court.
On February 13, the High Court disagreed with the trial court's approach, terming it illegal.
Justice Nagaprasanna observed that it is not appropriate to force an accused to resort to the RTI Act for documents he is entitled to get under Section 91 of the CrPC.
"The rejection of which is on the face of it illegal as that is not the purport of Section 91 of the CrPC that an accused should be driven for securing documents under the Right to Information Act when an application is filed under Section 91 of CrPC," the High Court said.
"The prosecution shall place on record the documents that are sought by the petitioner at the appropriate stage in the trial," the High Court ordered
Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru was booked in a criminal case in 2022 on allegations that he was involved in the abuse of two minor girls residing at a hostel run by the Jagadguru Murugarajendra Vidyapeetha Mutt.
The alleged offences were committed against minor girl students of Priyadarshini School, who were staying in Akkamahadevi Vasathi Nilaya, a hostel run by the Mutt.
It is alleged that a girl aged about 16 years was sexually harassed for around three and half years and that another minor girl aged about 15 years was sexually harassed for around one and half years by the accused (Sharanaru and four others).
The charges include those under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The criminal trial in this case is presently ongoing before an Additional District And Sessions Judge in Chitradurga.
Advocate BK Swamy appeared for Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru.
Additional Special Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesha appeared for the State.
[Read Order]
.JPG)
.JPG)
