CHAPTER VII: PROCESSES TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF THINGS(Section 91-105), Part A- SUMMONS TO PRODUCE (Section 91-92), The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

CHAPTER VII: PROCESSES TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF THINGS, A- Summons to produce (Section 91-92)

The law regarding processes to compel the production of documents and other movable property is laid down in section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Such processes are of 2 kinds, a summons and a search warrant.

SECTION 91: SUMMONS TO PRODUCE DOCUMENT OR OTHER THING

(1)SITUATION: Whenever,

• any court or any officer-in-charge (of a police station),
• considers the necessity and desire, (by or before such court or officer):
  • for production of any document or other thing,
  • to meet the purpose of any:
    • investigation,
    • inquiry,
    • trial, or
    • other proceeding under this Code. 

CONSEQUENCE: Such Court or officer, may:

• issue summons and a written order (respectively),
• to the person, in whose possession or power such document or thing is believed to be,
• requiring him to:
  • attend and produce it, or
  • produce it (at the time and place stated in the summons or order).

(2)Deemed compliance:

SITUATION: Any person (required under this section), on production of a document or other thing.

CONSEQUENCE: The person shall be deemed to have complied with the requisition:

• merely if he causes to produce such document or thing,
• instead of attending, to produce it, personally.

EXCEPTIONS (of this section):

• Nothing in this section shall be deemed to effect:
  • section 123 and 124, of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), or
  • the Banker’s Books Evidence Act, 1891 (13 of 1891), or
• Nothing in this section shall be deemed to apply:
  • to a letter, postcard, telegram or other document or any parcel or thing,
  • which are in the custody of the postal or telegram.

SECTION 92: PROCEDURE AS TO LETTERS AND TELEGRAMS

(1)Procedure of requiring document, parcel or thing by:

• District Magistrate,
• Chief Judicial Magistrate,
• Court of Session, or
• High Court.

SITUATION:

• If in the opinion of the District Magistrate, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Courts of Session, High Court,
• any document, parcel, or thing in the custody of a postal or telegram authority is wanted,
• wanted, for the purpose of any investigation, inquiry, trial, or other proceedings under this code.

CONSEQUENCE: Such Magistrate or Court may require-

• the postal or telegram authority (as the case may be),
• to deliver the document, parcel or thing,
• to such person as the Magistrate or Court directs.

(2)Procedure of requiring document, parcel, or thing by:

• Executive Magistrate,
• Judicial magistrate,
• Commissioner of Police, or
• District Superintendent of Police.

SITUATION: If in the opinion of any other Magistrate, whether Executive or Judicial, any Commissioner of Police, or District Superintendent of Police,

• any such document , parcel, or thing is wanted,
• wanted, for any such purpose of investigation, inquiry, trial, or other proceeding under this Code.

CONSEQUENCE: Such Magistrate (Executive or Judicial), Commissioner of Police, or District Superintendent of Police, may require:

• the postal or telegram authority (as the case may be),
• for the pending order of a District Magistrate, Chief Judicial Magistrate, or Court (under section 92(1)),
• in regard to such document, parcel, or thing, to cause research and detain.

CASE LAWS

CASE 1: Surendra Mohan Sarin V K.P. Mani Tripathi (1986 Cri.LJ 1324)

• It was observed that:
  • merely because an order made by an investigating officer to produce books of accounts and other things would cause “great inconvenience” to the persons from whom it has been summoned,
• It could not be held that:
  • the order made on this basis of the same was beyond the purview of section 91 of the Code.

CASE 2: Assistant Customs Collector, Bombay  V  L.R.Melwani (1970 72 BOMLR 782)

The Supreme Court in the case, ruled that:

• As to whether a particular document or thing under section 91 should be summoned or not,
• the discretion essentially lies with that of the trial Court, where the matter was initiated, and
• the High Court should not normally interfere with that same discretion of the Court,
  • unless there are valid reasons.

CASE 3: Om Parkash Sharma V Central Bureau of Investigation (2000(5)SCC 679)

The Court held that:

• Powers under section 91 are enabling in nature aimed only to enforce and ensure the production of documents.
• The language of the code indicates the width of the powers to be unlimited but the in-built limitation inherent therein takes it colour and shape from the stage or point of time of its exercise.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 91 AND 92:

SECTION 91: SUMMONS TO PRODUCE DOCUMENT OR OTHER THING

(1)Authorities involved:

• Any Court or police officer (officer in charge of police station)

(2)Production of:

• Document or things,
• Not letter or telegram.

(3)To serve purpose:

• Production before court.

SECTION 92: PROCEDURE AS TO LETTERS AND TELEGRAMS

(1)Authorities involved:

• Under section 92(1)- District Magistrate, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court of Session, or High Court.
• Under section 92(2)- Executive Magistrate, Judicial magistrate, Commissioner of Police, or District Superintendent of Police.

(2)Production of:

• Letter or telegram (from postal authorities).

(3)To serve purpose:

• Delivery to person, or
• Detain in order.

THIS (FIRST) PART OF THE SERIES ON CHAPTER: VII, CONSISTS OF A- SUMMONS TO PRODUCE, WHICH IS PART A IN THE CODE EVEN. SECOND PART CONSISTS OF PART B OF THE CODE.