In Brief
An accused facing trial sought to produce copies of police diary pages, obtained under the Right to Information Act, to cross-examine the investigating officer. The Supreme Court held that an accused cannot unilaterally produce police diary entries to contradict a witness. Section 172(3) of the CrPC permits use of police diaries only in limited circumstances—when the police officer refreshes his memory or when the court itself uses entries to contradict him. The accused cannot compel a police witness to refresh his memory from the diary. The trial court has exclusive, unfettered power to examine diaries for justice purposes. The Court set aside the High Court's order permitting production and allowed the appeal.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.