Section 311 CrPC Can Be Invoked To Seek Additional Documents In Black Money Act Case: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has recently held that courts can invoke Section 311 of the CrPC, which allows summoning or recalling evidence, to permit additional documents to be placed on record if necessary for a just decision, even in prosecution under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed petitions filed by businessman Deepak Talwar challenging orders of the trial court and revisional court, which had allowed the Income Tax Department to place certain additional documents on record. The bench observed,

“The aim of every Court is to discover the truth. Section 311 Cr.P.C. is one of the many such provisions, which strengthens the arm of the Court in its effort to unearth the truth by procedure sanctioned by law. This Section gives ample power to the Courts to recall, summon or re-examine any person in evidence if it appears to be essential to the just decision in the case.”

The case arose from a complaint filed by the Income Tax Department alleging offences under Section 51(1) read with Section 54 of the Black Money Act, following a search and seizure operation conducted in 2016.

Petitioner argued that once cognizance had been taken and summons issued, the prosecution could not be permitted to file additional documents at a later stage. It was contended that allowing such documents would amount to an impermissible amendment of the complaint and cause serious prejudice to the accused.

Rejecting this contention, the High Court held that no amendment was sought and only the Documents, which though mentioned in the Complaint, could not be filed earlier, were sought to be produced.

“Seeking to place on Record such documents cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, be termed as amendment of the Complaint,” it said.

The Court further underscored the wide ambit of Section 311 CrPC, adding that “The purpose and intent of the trial is to find out the truth and the truth alone should prevail and in its quest to find out and to reach the truth, the Trial court has been saddled with powers to make all efforts to reach the correct conclusion, which is the truth.”

As such, finding no infirmity in the orders of the lower courts, the High Court dismissed the petition.

For Petitioner: Senior Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir, Senior Advocate with Advocates Vaibhav Suri and Ariana Ahluwalia

For Respondent: Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Sanjeev Menon, JSC, Rahul Singh, JSC, Gaurav Kumar and Tanishq Ahuja