1 Appln.: 117/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.117 OF 2011 Shailesh R. Mahintura .... Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. A.A. Desai i/by Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Advocate for applicant. Mrs. U.V. Kezriwal, APP for State. Mr. S.P. Beldar, Police Inspector, DB Marg Police Station, Mumbai present. Coram : Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J. Date : 15th February, 2011 P.C. 1. The applicant herein is arraigned as an accused in C.R.No.27 of 2010 registered by Anti Corruption Bureau, Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) along with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The charge- sheet in the case filed by the Anti Corruption Bureau is accompanied by several documents including four compact discs (CDs) of recorded conversations on 4th June 2010, 13th May 2010, 14th May 2010 and 17th May 2010. The copy of the charge-sheet furnished to the applicant contains only the transcript of conversations in the CDs. He has not been provided with the 2 Appln.: 117/2011 copies of CDs. Therefore, on 21st December 2010, he filed the application at Exhibit 4 seeking directions to the prosecution to provide him with the copies of the four CDs. His application came to be rejected by the order dated 25th January 2010, impugned in the present application. The learned trial Judge has held that since the transcript of the conversation in the CDs has already been provided, it would be sufficient if the copies of CDs are made available to the applicant before the first witness is examined by the prosecution and there can be no prejudice caused to him, if the copies of CDs are not furnished at the stage of framing of charge. 2. Mr. Desai, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the learned Special Judge has held in his order that the CDs are documents within the meaning of Section 207(v) Code of Criminal Procedure and that the same are relied upon by the prosecution in the charge-sheet filed. In that circumstance, the mandate of Section 207(v) of Code of Criminal Procedure requires that copies of the CDs are furnished to the applicant. The learned A.P.P. fairly concedes to this position in law. She however states that the CDs have been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, State of Maharashtra for conducting Voice Identification Report. She tenders report dated 11th February 2011 from the Deputy Director, Forensic Science Laboratory addressed to Additional Commissioner of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Worli, Mumbai stating that the report of Voice Identification Test can be made 3 Appln.: 117/2011 available only on 21st March 2011, by giving top priority to the case. The learned APP makes a statement that as soon as the report is received along with four CDs, the same will be filed in the trial Court and thereafter copies thereof will be made available to the applicant through the court. 3. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the learned Special Judge holds an opinion that the purpose behind supplying the copies of the CDs is served by the supply of transcript of the conversation recorded in the CDs. The opinion held is not in conformity with the mandate of Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure. The conjoint reading of Section 207(v) and Section 173(5)(a) makes it obligatory on the prosecution to furnish the accused with the copies of all the documents, it proposes to rely upon as indicated in the chargesheet. The exception under the section is limited to voluminous documents. The proviso to Section 207 permits the court to give directions for inspection of the voluminous documents instead of copies of it, or furnish part of the statement. Transcript of the CDs is neither the document relied upon nor a part of it. The transcript is prepared by someone after listening to the CDs. Therefore unless copies of the CDs are furnished to the applicant, he will not be able to verify the accuracy of the transcript. Besides CDs as documents will consist not just of the contents of the conversation therein but also of the identity of the persons whose conversation is recorded. The 4 Appln.: 117/2011 applicant will not be able to comment upon the identity of the person without listening to the voices in the CDs. 4. For the above reasons and in view of the statement made, the application is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The application at Exhibit 40 is allowed. (Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J)