In Brief
A former Tamil Nadu Cabinet Minister challenged the High Court's refusal to disclose a preliminary enquiry report that initially found no criminal offence, after the State reversed its stand and registered an FIR following a change in political dispensation. The Supreme Court held that while Section 207 CrPC ordinarily limits document disclosure, this case was distinguishable because the FIR arose from direct judicial interference in writ proceedings. The Court emphasised that the State cannot repudiate its own affidavit accepting an exonerating report without affording the accused a hearing. The Court directed disclosure of the report and restoration of the writ petition to the High Court for reconsideration, reaffirming that prosecution must comply with fair trial rights under Article 21.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.