CM Attack Case: Delhi Court Directs Police to Provide FIR Copy to Accused Despite ‘Sensitive Case’ Claim

The direction was issued by Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Gaurav Goyal of the Tis Hazari Courts, who cited the settled principle laid down by the Supreme Court that an accused is entitled to a copy of the FIR against him.

“In view thereof, the instant application is allowed and IO concerned is directed to supply the copy of FIR within 24 hours against due acknowledgment. Application stands disposed of. Accused is also directed not to publish, circulate or disseminate the contents of the FIR in the public domain or to any third party without the permission of this court,” the Magistrate ordered.

The direction came after Sakariya moved an application before the trial court alleging that despite being arrested and charged with serious offences, he had not been provided a copy of the FIR, thereby violating his rights as an accused.

The case stems from a shocking incident on August 20, 2025, when Sakariya, a 41-year-old autorickshaw driver from Rajkot, Gujarat, posed as a complainant during a grievance redressal session at CM Gupta’s Civil Lines residence. Once inside, he allegedly assaulted the Chief Minister.

He was immediately overpowered by security personnel, arrested, and subsequently booked under multiple provisions of law, including attempted murder, assaulting a public servant, and obstructing public duty.

The Delhi Police opposed Sakariya’s application for a copy of the FIR, claiming that the report had been classified as “sensitive” through an internal order, and therefore could not be provided at this stage. They argued that the application was “premature and not maintainable.”

However, during the hearing, the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) conceded that the FIR could be shared subject to an undertaking by the accused that he would not circulate or disclose its contents.

Sakariya’s counsel countered this condition, pointing out that no such undertaking is mandated under law and that withholding the FIR from the accused would amount to a violation of natural justice and due process.

After considering the rival submissions, the Court sided with the accused.

The Magistrate made it clear that the FIR must be provided, while simultaneously protecting the confidentiality of its contents by directing that Sakariya must not publish or circulate the document without prior permission of the court.

The matter is expected to proceed to the next stage of trial once the accused receives the FIR copy.