In a recent legal verdict, the Supreme Court has unequivocally stated that invoking Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) by the accused to demand the production of documents or materials from the prosecution during the framing of charges is impermissible. This critical observation sheds light on the limitations of procedural rights afforded to the accused during this pivotal stage of criminal proceedings.
The apex court, faced with a succinct legal query, deliberated on the scope and applicability of Section 91 of the Cr.P.C in the context of charge framing. Central to this deliberation was the fundamental question of whether the accused could wield Section 91 as a tool to compel the prosecution to furnish evidence.
In rendering its judgment, the Supreme Court meticulously delineated the boundaries of procedural fairness and legal jurisdiction. It underscored that while the accused enjoys certain rights guaranteed under the Cr.P.C, the invocation of Section 91 to mandate the production of materials by the prosecution during the framing of charges stands beyond the realm of permissible legal maneuvering.
This seminal ruling elucidates the nuanced interplay between the rights of the accused and the procedural framework governing criminal trials. By clarifying the limitations surrounding the invocation of Section 91 at the charge framing stage, the Supreme Court has fortified the integrity of criminal proceedings while upholding the principles of legal equity and due process.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
