1 WP-989-2011 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 989 OF 2011 Dr. Niyaz Ahmed s/o. Deen Mohd. Ansari ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.P.M.Pradhan for petitioner. Ms.M.H.Mhatre, APP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U.D.SALVI, JJ. June 27, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Mr.Pradhan, the learned counsel for the petitioner who is an accused in Sessions Case No.20 of 2008. It has been alleged that he caused the unnatural death of his wife Firoza sometime prior to 11/9/2007 when her dead body was exhumed on receiving complaint / information. On completion of investigation a charge-sheet has been filed for the 2 WP-989-2011 offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 197 and 498A of IPC. 2. The petitioner submitted an application seeking directions to produce the CD of post mortem / photographs thereof as well as other relevant details as mentioned in the application and by a reasoned order dated 8/3/2011 the learned Addl. Sessions Judge was pleased to reject the said application. The Sessions Court observed that though the accused had asked for the documents to be supplied as per the list attached to the application, unless the prosecution relied upon the said documents or the documents filed as per Section 173 of Cr.P.C., it would not be permissible to entertain the said application. 3. Mr.Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the communication dated 10/6/2009 addressed by the Senior P.I. to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone II, Bhiwandi, Kalyan and submitted that the documents ought to be made available to him so as to defend his case. Mr.Pradhan submitted that the petitioner cannot take a defence unless the documents asked for are supplied to him. 4. We are not impressed by these general arguments. The specific 3 WP-989-2011 observation of the trial Court is that the documents asked for have not been relied upon by the prosecution in the instant case which indicates that the trial Court is aware that the accused must get copies of the documents / CDs if they have been relied upon by the prosecution. Even if during the course of trial the prosecution submits any additional documents / record / CDs, nothing stops the petitioner from asking for copies of the same. 5. We, therefore, do not find any case to show indulgence at this stage and if the petitioner applies for copies of any other documents that may be submitted and relied upon by the prosecution, we are sure the learned Addl. Sessions Judge will pass appropriate order on such application. Hence no case for interference is made out and the petition is rejected. We also make it clear that in case the petitioner wants to take a defence during the trial, he may step in the witness box and call for the documents. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)