'Stranger' Not Entitled To Certified Copies Of Criminal Records, Court Should Call For Objections From Affected Persons: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has ruled that third parties cannot claim an automatic right to certified copies of documents filed in criminal proceedings, particularly in cases investigated by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO).Justice V.G. Arun delivered the judgment while deciding three connected criminal miscellaneous cases concerning the SFIO probe into Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd. (CMRL) and Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Limited. The dispute centered on whether BJP Leader Shone George, whistleblower in the case, was entitled to certified copies of the SFIO's complaint against CMRL along with accompanying documents filed before the Special Court. The Special Judge directed to issue certified copy of the complaint on usual terms.The High Court noted that Rule 226 of the Kerala Criminal Rules of Practice governs applications for certified copies by “strangers” to proceedings. While such applications may be filed, issuance of certified copies to a stranger is not a matter of right, Court held. It added that Courts must scrutinize the stated purpose and record reasons before granting or refusing copies."From a conjoint reading of sub-sections 5 and 6 of Section 363 (CrPC), along with Rules 222 and 226, it is clear that a stranger to the proceedings is not entitled for certified copies of the records as of right. Rule 226 only allows the stranger to apply for the copies and it is the duty of the court concerned to consider the purpose set forth in the verified petition and decide whether to issue the copies. Being vested with such a duty, the reason for allowing or rejecting the prayer for issuance of certified copies should be discernible from the order passed by the court." the Court held.It was contended that as per Section 212 (13) of the Companies Act, any person concerned is entitles to obtain a copy of the investigation report by making an application in that regard and the Companies Act being a special enactment, will prevail over the Criminal Rules and Practice. The Court however observed that Section 212(13) confers a limited right on “persons concerned” to obtain a copy of the investigation report. Since the petitioner had already received the investigation report, the statutory requirement stood satisfied."Even accepting that an interested person can apply and obtain a copy of the investigation report by resorting to Section 212(13), insofar as the other documents are concerned, the submission of applications, their processing and the decision of the court can only be in accordance with Rule 226." the Court observed. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Saurav Das v Union of India and Others [(2023) 11 SCC 154], the court observed that the certified copies which are applied for, are not public documents. It further added that in cases where the Court finds a possibility of the privacy of the parties being infringed, the parties are bound to be put on notice about the application. The Court urged the Rules Committee to consider amending Rule 226 to empower courts to seek objections from affected parties before granting access to sensitive records.The Court observed that the certified copies were issued without considering the purpose stated in the applications. "The cryptic manner in which the orders are passed has also rendered them unsustainable." it addedThe High Court thus allowed CMRL's challenge, quashed the Special Court's orders, and directed that fresh, reasoned decisions be issued on applications for certified copies. Case Title: Shone George v Union of India and connected mattersCase No: Crl. M C 5765/ 2025Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 574Counsel for Petitioner: Mariya Rajan, Shinu J Pillai, S Suja, Ann Mariya John, Felix Samson VargheseCounsel for Respondent: O M Shalina(DSGI), V John Sebastian Ralph, Vishnu Chandran, Ralph Reti John, Giridhar Krishna Kumar, Geethu T A, Mary Greeshma, Liz JohnyClick Here To Read/ Download Judgment

'Stranger' Not Entitled To Certified Copies Of Criminal Records, Court Should Call For Objections From Affected Persons: Kerala High Court

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Anamika MJ

'Stranger' Not Entitled To Certified Copies Of Criminal Records, Court Should Call For Objections From Affected Persons: Kerala High Court

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers