Uttarakhand High Court
July vs Directorate Of Enforcement (Ed) on 1 July, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:5552
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No.143 of 2025
01 July, 2025
Banmeet Singh --Revisionist
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement (ED) --Respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Abhimanshu Dhyani, learned counsel for revisionist.
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned Special Counsel with Ms.
Monika Pant, learned counsel for respondent/E.D. (both
through V.C.).
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By means of the present criminal revision, the
revisionist has prayed for following reliefs:
A. Allow the present application and call for record of Spl.
Sessions Trial No.29 of 2024, titled ‘Directorate of
Enforcement v. Banmeet Singh‘ arising out of
ECIR/DNSZO/04/2023 dated 24.07.2023 pending
adjudication before the learned District & Sessions
Judge, Dehradun District Courts, Dehradun to examine
the record and exercise powers of revision; and
B. Set aside and quash the order dated 13.12.2024 passed
by the Ld. District & Session Judge, Dehradun District
Courts, in Spl. Sessions Trial No.29 of 2024, titled
‘Directorate of Enforcement v. Banmeet Singh‘ arising out
of ECIR/DNSZO/04/ 2023 dated 24.07.2023, for which
act of kindness, the Applicant shall ever pray; and
C. Direct the Respondent to comply with the order dated
09.08.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court and
supply copies of the un-relied-upon documents collected
during the investigation but not made part of the
prosecution complaint, as directed vide the
aforementioned order dated 09.08.2024; and
D. Pass appropriate directions to ensure that, for the
purpose of exercising powers by the Courts in the State
of Uttarakhand, due application of judicial mind is made
to all relevant and proximate matters. The said Courts
ought to address prayers for proceedings under Section
230 of the BNSS, 2023, while adhering to the following
parameters:
i. Ensure mandatory compliance with Section 230 of
1
2025:UHC:5552
the BNSS, 2023, including the supply of legible
copies of all documents mentioned from (i) to (v)
under the said section; and
ii. Supply of list of un-relied documents to the accused
person in terms of judgement of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in To issue Certain Guidelines Regarding
Inadequacies and Deficiencies in Criminal
Trials Versus the State of Andhra Pradesh &
Ors. Bearing Suo Moto Writ (Crl) No.1 of 2017 and
also to determine by way of a reasoned order if
any of such listed document is required at the
stage of arguments on charge, if such a request is
made in writing by way of an application or for
refusal thereof; and
iii. In case of refusal of supply of such un-relied
documents, if an opportunity is sought to inspect
such documents, after appearance of accused
consequent to summoning order and before framing
of charge, then such permission must be granted in
order to avail the right of fair trial as observed by
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment titled
Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement
bearing SLP (Criminal) No.8772 of 2024.
3. The learned counsel for the revisionist
submitted that in spite of the clear bar under Section
403 of the BNSS Act prohibiting Criminal Courts to alter
its own judgment, the learned Special Court below vide
order dated 13.12.2024 had committed grave irregularity
by recalling its own order dated 09.08.2024, whereby,
the respondent was directed to provide legible copies of
certain documents, which form part of prosecution’s
complaint and also any other document collected during
the investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist vehemently
argued that in absence of the documents relied upon by
the prosecution, the revisionist will not be able to raise
effective defence, thereby violating his right to a fair trial.
He further argued that due to lack of access of those
documents, he was not able to tender submission at the
charge framing stage. Therefore, he should be granted a
fair opportunity right from the charge framing stage.
2
2025:UHC:5552
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-ED has
drawn the attention of this Court to a judgment rendered
by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Gupta and
Another Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2025 SCC
OnLine SC 1063, particularly in Para 55(d) and (e),
which clearly specifies that an accused can apply for
production of documents at defence evidence stage. For
ready reference Para 55(d) and (e) is quoted herein
below:-
“55.(d). At the time of hearing for framing of charge,
reliance can be placed only on the documents forming part
of the chargesheet. In case of the PMLA, at the time of
framing charge, reliance can be placed only on those
documents which are produced along with the complaint or
supplementary complaints. Though the accused will be
entitled to a list of documents, objects, exhibits etc. that are
not relied upon by the ED at the stage of framing of charge,
in ordinary course, the accused is not entitled to seek
copies of the said documents at the stage of framing of
charge.
55.(e) At the stage of entering upon defence, an accused
can apply for the issue of process for the production of any
document or thing in accordance with Section 233(3) of the
CrPC (Section 256(3) of the BNSS). At this stage, he can
also apply for the production of a document or a thing that
is in the custody of the prosecution but has not been
produced. A fair trial is a part of the right guaranteed to an
accused under Article 21 of the Constitution. The right to a
fair trial of the accused includes the right to defend. The
right to defend consists of the right to lead the defence
evidence by examining the witnesses and producing the
documents. Therefore, the accused is entitled to exercise
his right at the stage of entering upon defence by
compelling the prosecution or a third party to produce a
document or a thing in their possession or custody. The
Court can decline the request of the accused for issuing
process for the production of documents only on the limited
grounds set out in sub-section (3) of section 233 of the
CrPC.”
6. After arguing a while, learned counsel for the
respondent-ED submits that he is ready to submit the
documents which are being sought by the revisionist and
are being relied upon by the prosecution.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the
parties and on perusal of the material available on
3
2025:UHC:5552
record, this Court is of the considered opinion that
production of document relied upon by the prosecution is
part of right to fair trial enshrined under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India, as only when the accused has
access to the documents, he will be able to raise an
effective defence. Therefore, this Court is of the view that
the impugned order passed by learned Court below is
bad in law on two grounds, firstly being it amounts to
recalling of its own order, which is expressly prohibited
under Section 403 BNSS Act and secondly, as it
encroaches upon and hinders the right to fair trial
available under Article 21 of the Constitution of India to
the revisionist/accused. As far as the contention of the
learned counsel for the revisionist regarding retrial from
charge framing stage is concerned, this Court is of the
opinion that the matter is squarely covered by the
judgment rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Sarla Gupta and Another (Supra), and the revisionist
can use the documents for his defence in defence
evidence stage.
8. The offshoot of the above discussions is that
the present revision is allowed and the impugned order
dated 13.12.2024 passed by the Ld. District & Session
Judge, Dehradun District Courts, in Special Sessions
Trial No.29 of 2024 Directorate of Enforcement v. Banmeet
Singh, is hereby set aside.
9. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed
of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
01.07.2025
PN
PREETI Digitally signed by PREETI NEGI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=63c75a8c4765581180a58d7478fadbe38331bac55c78b5f9f0
NEGI
276c16432f6aab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=2BA53171893B3C3CB3CCCAE81FAE064498483A83D8
4BDB0F9229D5BF08D959AC, cn=PREETI NEGI
Date: 2025.07.02 16:20:30 +05’30’
4