Delhi HC allows Rau’s CEO access to documents from basement
The Delhi high court has allowed the chief executive officer of a coaching institute at Old Rajendra Nagar — where three IAS aspirants died by drowning in July 2024 — to get possession of some financial documents, dismissing apprehensions by the parent of one of the deceased that doing so would derail the trial in the case.
The April 1 order, made public later, upheld a city court’s order of September 26, 2024 that permitted Rau’s IAS Study Circle CEO Abhishekh Gupta to get a photocopy of certain financial documents lying in the coaching centre’s premises. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), probing the case also had no objection to the trial court order.
A bench of justice Amit Mahajan passed the order, rejecting the plea filed by J Dalvin Suresh, the father of Nevin Dalvin, 29 — one of three IAS aspirants who died in the July 27, 2024 tragedy. Tanya Soni, 21, and Shreya Yadav, 25, were the other victims.
“While it is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the application being allowed will derail the investigation as the accused will get to know in which direction the investigation is going, the nature of the said documents when one looks at the scope of the investigation as well as the no objection from CBI points towards the contrary,” the high court said
In his application argued by advocate Abhijit Anand, Suresh said that the documents formed part of the investigation, and the court under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita section 230 could not have handed over the photocopy of the documents before filing of the charge sheet.
This provision deals with the supply of copies of police reports and other documents to the accused in criminal proceedings.
However, the high court bench said, “This court fails to understand as to how enabling Respondent No.2 (Gupta) to get photocopies of certain documents that were seized from his office will prejudice the case of the prosecution, especially when no such objection is raised by the investigating agency.”
Gupta, represented through senior advocate Rebecca John, submitted that the documents in question were only some financial documents belonging to him, and could not prejudice the investigation since they did not form a part of it.
In his nine-page order, justice Mahajan asserted that section 230 was incorporated by the legislature to protect the accused’s right with regards to the material relied on by the prosecution and does not bar the court from providing documents forming part of the investigation.
