Join our WhatsApp Group
Breaking
Friday, October 2, 2026 Jaipur Edition
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Law

Supreme Court Sets Out How an Accused Can Access CBI's 'Unrelied' Documents: Inspect First, Seek Production at Trial

The Supreme Court set aside orders compelling the CBI to produce documents it had not relied on, at the stage of framing of charges. Without deciding the conflict between Debendra Nath Padhi and Sarla Gupta, it held that an accused may access documents held by the prosecution to shape the defence, but the stage depends on the document: voluminous unrelied material is inspected, and specific documents are produced at trial.

Supreme Court Sets Out How an Accused Can Access CBI's 'Unrelied' Documents: Inspect First, Seek Production at Trial
Photo: Subhashish Panigrahi via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Judgment Intelligence

Other
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Anil Dixit
2026 INSC 1064
Criminal Appeal No. 4618 of 2026 (arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 17158 of 2026)
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
25 September 2026
Bench
Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran
Relevant Acts & Sections
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sections 91 and 227; Right to Information Act, 2005
Final Outcome

Appeal disposed of. The impugned orders were set aside to facilitate an expeditious trial, and the Trial Court was directed to proceed in accordance with the Court's directions on inspection and production (paras 11-15).

Key holdings

  1. The Court left the Debendra Nath Padhi and Sarla Gupta question open and decided the stage document by document (para 7).
  2. Voluminous unrelied documents are met by inspection; a specific document is sought when the relevant witness is examined (para 11).
  3. Documents named at inspection in a writing signed by both parties must be produced before the Trial Court and kept available for trial (para 11).
  4. Documents not with the CBI cannot be ordered produced; the accused may use the RTI Act or a defence witness (paras 12-13).

Brief Facts

In a CBI case before the Special Judge No. 1, CBI, Ranchi, the accused applied under Section 91 CrPC for ten categories of documents, including seizure memos, CBI registers, the source information report, all seized but unrelied documents, minutes of building committee meetings, videography and the appointment files of two architects not charge-sheeted (paras 2, 8). The application was allowed on 21.09.2019 (para 2). The CBI produced some documents, calling others confidential or unavailable (paras 3, 9). A further order of 18.07.2022 was affirmed in the impugned order, which the CBI challenged (para 3). Before the Supreme Court, the accused filed an affidavit that he was not seeking source information or case diaries (para 5).

Court's Findings

The CBI relied on State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi, under which an accused's entitlement under Section 91 ordinarily arises only at the defence stage. The accused relied on Sarla Gupta v. Directorate of Enforcement, which read Padhi as confined to the 'record of the case' under Section 227, though it said copies of unrelied documents are ordinarily not available at the charge stage (paras 5-6). The Bench left this open. It proceeded on the premise that the accused is entitled to documents available with the prosecuting agency to shape the defence, holding that the stage depends on the specific documents sought (para 7). Seizure memos were produced; the request for CBI registers and source information was withdrawn (para 10). Voluminous unrelied documents may be inspected, and a specific document sought when the relevant witness is examined; alternatively, documents named at inspection in a writing signed by both sides must be produced before the Trial Court (para 11). Minutes of other meetings can be sought the same way; if the CBI lacks them, the accused may use the RTI Act or a defence witness (para 12). Documents the CBI does not have cannot be ordered produced (para 13).

Legal Principle

An accused may access documents in the prosecution's possession to prepare the defence, but when depends on the document. Voluminous unrelied material is met by inspection, with production of specific documents at trial when the relevant witness is examined; documents not in the agency's possession cannot be ordered produced.

Precedents Relied Upon

  1. State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005) 1 SCC 568
    Referred To Discussed at ¶ 5, 6, 7

    Relied on by the CBI: an accused's entitlement to seek an order under Section 91 CrPC would ordinarily not arise until the stage of defence. The Bench proceeded without deciding between this and Sarla Gupta.

  2. Sarla Gupta and Another v. Directorate of Enforcement (2025) 7 SCC 626
    Referred To Discussed at ¶ 5, 6, 7

    Relied on by the accused: read Debendra Nath Padhi as concerning the 'record of the case' under Section 227 CrPC, while holding (para 68.4) that an accused is entitled to a list of unrelied documents but ordinarily not to copies at the charge stage. The Bench did not decide the point.

Nyay Vidhan
Court Judgments · 3 min read
Decided: September 25, 2026 Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran
PDF
WhatsApp Telegram X / Twitter LinkedIn

✕

Popular: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt