IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8523 of 2010 NARYAN CHOWDHARY S/O LATE LAXMI NARYAN CHOWDHARY R/O VILLAGE SHUGAUNA P.S.- RAJNAGAR DIST:- MADHUBANI, REVENUE COLLECTOR HALKA-2 BAXUR, BLOCK- BAXUR. …………….Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THRU. VIG. ……………. Opposite Party ----------- 2. 01.12.2010 Heard the parties. The petitioner seek quashing of the order dated 2.2.2010, by which the Special Judge Vigilance Trap, Patna in Special Case No. 26 of 2008 has refused the prayer to sending the Yellow Paper (Constitution of Trap Team) to Government Forensic Science Laboratory at his cost. The background of the case is that a First Information Report was instituted against the petitioner on 27.6.2008 under Section 7/13 (2), 13 (i) (d) P.C. Act., for having been arrested by the Trap Team accepting Rs. 32,00/- as bribe. Thereafter final charge sheet was submitted upon which cognizance was taken. The petitioner had earlier come before this court praying therein that he had been supplied few pages of the case diary while he was in custody but not the entire. He also made a prayer for supply of Yellow paper which had been prepared by the vigilance which was allowed by this court by order dated 23.12.2009 vide Cr. Misc. No. 4387/09. Now the petitioner’s prayer is that the yellow paper which was supplied to him appears to be prepared later on, and, therefore, it was required to be sent to the FSL which the court below rejected. Before passing any final order in the present application, I think it will be proper to understand the scheme of collecting of material during investigation and supply of the same to an accused for which one must revert to Section 173 (5) Cr.P.C. which reads as follows: “When such report is in respect of a case to which Section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report- (a) all documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation; (b) the statements recorded under Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witness. (Italics Mine) Whereas Section 207 Cr.P.C. reads as here in under; “Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents.- In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following: (i) the police report; (ii) the first information recorded under section 154; (iii) the statements recorded under sub Section (3) of section 161 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses excluding therefrom any part in regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub Section (6) of Section 173: (iv) the confession and statements, if any, recorded under Section 164; (v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub section (5) of section 173: Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused: Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in Court”. Reading closely Sections 207 (5) and Cr.P.C. one finds that there is always a misconception about what exactly are the police papers which are required to be furnished to an accused in a criminal trial and it is because of misconception that the petitioner had made a prayer before this court that the Yellow paper should be supplied to him. To further clarify, I may add here that it is only those documents which the prosecution intends to rely upon are to be supplied to the accused persons for the reason that the accused may not suffer any injustice on simple being confronted by a fact which was not known to him at the beginning of the trial. In these circumstances, I find no merit in the application. The application is dismissed. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )