Supply Of Police Papers To Accused 'Epitome Of Fair Trial': Allahabad High Court Quashes Charges Framed Sans S. 230 BNSS Compliance

Emphasizing that the procedural mandate for supplying police reports to an accused is not a mere formality but the "epitome of a fair trial", the Allahabad High Court recently quashed charges framed against an accused under the BNS and POCSO Act over non-compliance with Section 230 BNSS [Supply to accused of copy of police report and other documents]. A bench of Justice Avnish Saxena thus allowed a petition filed by an accused under Section 528 BNSS and observed that any trial proceeding conducted in contravention of Section 230 BNSS violates the cardinal principle of a free and fair trial. Briefly put, the accused faced allegations under Sections 137(2), 87, 352 and 65(1) BNS and certain provisions of the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act. The trial court took cognizance of the charge sheet on January 6, 2025, and subsequently fixed a date for framing of charges on April 4, 2025. Before the HC, the applicant's counsel, Advocate Divyanshu Pathak, contended that the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Etawah, had failed to ensure the mandatory supply of the police report and relied upon documents to the accused as required under Section 230 BNSS. It was argued that without the supply of these documents, the accused was effectively deprived of the statutory right to move a discharge application under Sections 261 and 262 BNSS. The State and the private respondent, on the other hand, argued that the trial court had provided the copies of police papers and documents, which had been received by the accused-applicant on the margin of the order. It was also submitted that the cognizance was taken in the presence of the accused and sufficient time was provided to the accused to move the discharge application, but since he did not move the same, the charges were ultimately framed on April 4, 2025. Upon perusing the record as well as the order in question, the bench noted that while the accused's signature appeared on the margin, the order itself made no mention of the mandatory requirement to furnish copies of the police papers. "The order does not show the compliance of mandatory requirement of Section 230 B.N.S.S. as there is no compliance directed in the order, it cannot be inferred by the signatures of the accused at the margin that the copies of the documents and police papers would have been provided to the accused-applicant", the bench observed. It added that the compliance of Section 230 BNSS is not a mere formality but an epitome of fair trial. The Court highlighted that Section 230 BNSS mandates the Magistrate to furnish the police report and statements to the accused without delay, and in no case beyond fourteen days from the date of production or appearance. The Court, however, rejected the applicant's contention that fixing a date for framing charges was illegal. The single judge reasoned that it cannot be anticipated whether the accused-applicant may move the application for discharge or not. As such, the Court held, the fixing of a date for framing of charge is a just and proper order. However, holding that the non-compliance had made the proceedings in contravention to the legal provision, the High Court quashed the charges framed on April 4, 2025. The Court directed that the applicant be provided with the police papers within a week. It also granted him the liberty to move a discharge application thereafter under Sections 261 and 262 of the BNSS. Case title - Vijendra Kumar vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 60Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 60Click Here To Read/Download Order

Supply Of Police Papers To Accused 'Epitome Of Fair Trial': Allahabad High Court Quashes Charges Framed Sans S. 230 BNSS Compliance

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags