Supreme Court Stays Order Directing Electronic Evidence To Delhi Riots Accused Devangana Kalita

The Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi passed the interim order while hearing the Delhi Government's challenge to the High Court's ruling.

Appearing for the Delhi Police, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju argued that an accused is not entitled to seek copies of documents beyond those relied upon by the prosecution before charges are framed.

"You are not entitled to any document until charges are framed. They can't ask for any other document. What is the purpose of inspection at this stage?" Raju submitted, relying on Supreme Court precedents, including the judgment in Sarla Gupta.

Referring to the impugned High Court order, Justice Kumar asked the ASG to address paragraph 74, where the High Court had observed that furnishing the material was necessary to ensure a fair trial.

Raju countered that the concept of a fair trial at that stage was misplaced, arguing that the trial commences only after charges are framed, as held in Hardeep Singh.

"The inspection is only to delay the trial," he contended.

Opposing the appeal, Advocate Adit S. Pujari for Devangana Kalita relied on the Sarla Gupta judgment, arguing that while copies of documents not relied upon by the prosecution may not be supplied before charges, the accused is nevertheless entitled to the list of such documents at the stage of framing of charge.

Pujari further argued that the electronic evidence sought included videos that, according to the defence, demonstrated Kalita was peacefully protesting and not involved in stone pelting.

"I wanted a copy of the video which shows I was peacefully protesting. Where is the question that I was throwing stones? I should be discharged. Why should I go through the trial?" Pujari submitted.

Justice Kumar, however, observed: "Very good defence, but not at this stage."

Expressing concern over delays in the proceedings, the Bench remarked: "You will not conclude your arguments within 10 years, and then you say there is delay in trial!"

The Court thereafter stayed the operation of the Delhi High Court's order directing disclosure of the electronic evidence sought by Kalita. The matter has been listed for further hearing after two weeks. 

Background of the Case

Notably, on November 16, 2023, the High Court had issued notice to Delhi Police on Kalita's plea. Justice Amit Bansal had directed the Delhi Police to submit their reply.