Delhi High Court: In the writ petition filed by petitioner, one of the persons accused of being part of Delhi Riots in the backdrop of protest against Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 and National Register of Citizens, challenging the order concerning inspection of unrelied documents in Malkhana and the supply of deficit documents under Section 207, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), the Single Judge Bench of Neena Bansal Krishna, J., considering the importance and significance of the issues raised, allowed the petition seeking permission to inspect unrelied Malkhana documents and directed the prosecution to facilitate and ensure inspection of the Malkhana expeditiously and strictly in accordance with law.
The instant matter arose in the backdrop of the riots that occurred in North-East Delhi in March 2020.
The Court noted that both writ petitions involved issues possessed “seminal importance and significance”, i.e., regarding the rights of an accused person in criminal proceedings and the obligations of the prosecution in relation to disclosure and access to documents, requiring balancing of the rights of the accused vis-à-vis the right of the State, to ensure fair trial
The Court identified two principal issues:
-
Whether the petitioner was entitled to inspection of unrelied documents kept in the Malkhana in connection with the criminal proceedings.
-
Whether there existed any entitlement to the supply of alleged deficit documents under Section 207 CrPC as claimed in the connected writ petition.
The Court emphasised that the questions involved in the petitions were not confined to the rights of the parties before it but had wider implications and therefore required deeper research and appreciation of the law before a final decision could be rendered. While acknowledging the importance of expeditious pronouncement of reserved judgments, as repeatedly emphasised by the Supreme Court, the Court recorded that the matters demanded greater thought and articulation because of the legal questions involved.
The Court held that the writ petition seeking permission to inspect unrelied documents in the Malkhana deserved to be allowed. It directed the prosecution to facilitate and ensure inspection of the Malkhana expeditiously and strictly in accordance with law. It also directed the petitioner to cooperate so that the trial proceedings would not be unnecessarily delayed or held up unnecessarily.
However, the Court dismissed the writ petition related to the supply of deficit documents under Section 207 CrPC as being without merit.
[Devangana Kalita v. State (NCT of Delhi), W.P.(CRL) 925/2025, CRL.M.A.8681/2025, order dated 5-6-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Mr. Adit S. Pujari, Mr. Chaitanya Sundriyal, Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhwat, Mr. Siddharth Kaushal, Mr. Harshwardhan Pushkin Sharma, Advs., Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. Amit Prasad and Mr. Madhukar Pandey, SPP with Mr. Ayodhya Prasad, Mr. Aarush Bhatia, Mr. Dhruv Pande, Mr. Saravjeet Singh, Mr. Harshil Jain Advs., Counsel for the Respondent/State
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
