Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents
Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents. In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following: - (i) the police report; The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following: -
(i) the police report;
(ii) the first information report recorded under section 154;
(iii) the statements recorded under sub-section (3) of section 161 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses, excluding therefrom any part in regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub-section (6) of section 173 ;
(iv) the confessions and statements, if any, recorded under section 164;
(v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub-
section (5) of section 173:
Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused :
Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any document referred to in clause (v) is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused with a copy thereof, direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through pleader in Court.
Section 207, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 230 Supply to accused of copy of police report and other documents Text carried over almost unchanged 89%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep v. State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgement of Main Case order-16.pdf 2019-11-29. Crl A 1794/2019. Khanwilkar. DATE-CHECK flagged 2017-02-18/17 and 2017-04-17 FIR/report dates (false positive); body is the named reportable. Contents of a memory card are a 'document' (electronic record); the accused is entitled to a cloned copy under CrPC 207, subject to privacy conditions. High Court erred in treating it as a mere material object. Map CrPC 207 + BNSS 230. Do not successor-map IEA 3→BSA 2 (mapping.csv only close 0.6369). Do not map 66E/67A (FIR only).
On this section: Contents of a memory card are a document/electronic record; the accused is entitled to a cloned copy under s.207, subject to privacy conditions (Dileep).
-
Hussain vs Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This right cannot be denied due to lack of resources. When criminal trials or appeals remain pending for extended periods without fault of the accused, the accused is entitled to either expedited trial completion within specified timelines (6 months for magisterial trials and 2 years for sessions trials with accused in custody; 5 years for appeals) or bail. High Courts are constitutionally obligated to issue directions to subordinate courts ensuring these timelines are met, and to monitor compliance through appropriate action plans and judicial performance assessments. The State is required to augment judicial infrastructure, including appointing additional judges, establishing forensic laboratories, and digitizing case records, to fulfill this constitutional obligation. Undertrial prisoners who have undergone detention exceeding the likely sentence upon conviction must be released on personal bond. These are mandatory obligations, not discretionary matters.
On this section: Compliance regarding furnishing of copies of charge-sheets to accused; directed digitization and electronic format compliance
-
Ram Prakash Chaddha vs The State of Uttar Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
At the stage of considering discharge application under Section 227 Cr.PC, the court must confine its consideration to 'the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith' (prosecution materials only) and determine whether a prima facie case exists based on grave suspicion emerging from such materials. Mere suspicion, supposition, or conjecture not founded on materials on record cannot justify framing charges. In cases of criminal conspiracy, there must be at least an allegation of agreement between conspirators; absent such allegation or evidence of agreement in prosecution materials, charges of conspiracy cannot be framed merely on basis of suspicious circumstances. The court is not a mere post office of prosecution but must exercise independent judicial mind to protect accused from frivolous prosecution, especially at pre-trial stage.
On this section: Relates to documents to be supplied to accused; relevant for determining what constitutes 'record of case and documents submitted therewith' under Section 227
-
Brijendra Singh vs State of Rajasthan
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The power conferred by Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on courts to summon persons not arraigned as accused to face trial is discretionary and extraordinary in nature. This power must be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where circumstances warrant. A much stricter degree of satisfaction than the prima facie case standard (applicable at cognizance or charge-framing) is required. The court must be satisfied that strong and cogent evidence has occurred against the person from the evidence led before the court indicating that such person may be guilty of committing the offence for which such person could be tried together with already arraigned accused. Mere probability of complicity or weak oral testimony that has already been rejected during investigation is insufficient to invoke this extraordinary power. The trial court and High Court must carefully examine all material on record, including investigative findings, before invoking Section 319 powers, and the exercise of this power in casual or cavalier manner without such scrutiny cannot withstand judicial review.
On this section: Pre-trial committal stage; court noted Section 319 power cannot be exercised during this stage
-
Central Bureau of Investigation vs Anuj Pandey
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Police custody remand under Section 167 Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be authorized by a Magistrate for an accused person arrested during further investigation after charge sheet filing, if the Magistrate is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for such detention. The expression 'accused if in custody' in Section 309(2) CrPC refers only to accused before court at cognizance or trial stage and does not apply to accused arrested during further investigation, whose detention is governed by Section 167 CrPC provisions and safeguards.
On this section: Court noted requirement to provide copies to accused before commitment to Sessions court.
-
Central Bureau of Investigation vs Rathin Dandapath
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a person is arrested during further investigation after a charge sheet has been filed, the provisions of Section 167 CrPC governing detention in police or judicial custody shall apply to such person as long as further investigation continues, and the expression 'accused if in custody' in Section 309(2) CrPC does not include such persons. Consequently, a Magistrate has authority to grant police remand to the investigating agency for such arrested persons if the agency satisfies the legal requirements under Section 167, and cannot refuse such remand merely on the ground that charge sheet has been filed.
On this section: Requires provision of copies to accused before commitment. Referenced in procedural context of the case progression.
-
Suman vs State of Rajasthan
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A person who is named in a first information report or complaint with allegation of committing a particular crime or offence, but against whom the police does not file a charge-sheet or drops the case, can be proceeded against under Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure if from the evidence collected or produced in the course of any inquiry into or trial of an offence, the court is prima facie satisfied that such person has committed any offence for which such person can be tried with other accused. The non-filing of charge-sheet by police against such person is not a bar to invoking the jurisdiction of the court under Section 319 CrPC.
On this section: Summoning of additional accused before Sessions Court; historical precedent provision discussed in relation to Section 319
-
Jagdish Chandra vs C.b.i.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Hard discs on which intercepted telephone conversations have been recorded are electronic records and therefore documents within the meaning of Section 173(5)(a) read with Section 207(v) CrPC. The prosecution is obliged to furnish to the accused copies of only such documents that it proposes to rely upon as indicated in the charge sheet or of those already sent to the court during investigation. At the pre-charge stage, the trial court cannot direct the prosecution to furnish copies of documents other than those which it proposes to rely upon. However, where the charge sheet indicates that the prosecution is relying upon certain documents, the accused must be given access to those documents. In the instant case, the scope of the APFSL examination was to certify that the hard discs were properly functioning and that the calls copied on to the CDs were true copies of the original recordings in the hard discs. Only to this extent can it be said that the hard discs are being relied upon by the prosecution. The certification in terms of Section 65B(4) EA does not obviate the statutory requirement under Section 207(v) of providing to the accused access to the original recording of the relevant intercepted telephone conversation as a relied upon document. Therefore, the accused should be permitted to listen to the original recordings of the relevant intercepted telephonic conversations relied upon by the prosecution by having the said original recordings played directly from the hard discs in the presence of the accused or their representatives, their counsel and the learned Judge.
On this section: Magistrate must furnish to accused copies of any other document or relevant extract forwarded with police report under Section 173(5)
-
Shashi Kumar Unnikrishnan vs Republic of India(c.b.i.)
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a trial court allows the prosecution to place on record documents that were inadvertently omitted from the charge sheet, the prosecution is obligated to supply all such documents to the accused in accordance with Section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The accused retains the right to file a discharge application after receiving the documents, which shall be considered in accordance with law. The court will not interfere with the trial court's discretionary order allowing the admission of omitted documents if the omission was inadvertent and not malafide, and if adequate procedural safeguards are in place to protect the accused's rights.
On this section: Requirement to supply all documents to the accused after charge sheet is filed; the court emphasized that documents brought on record must be supplied to the petitioner in accordance with this section
-
Rajpal Singh vs State of Punjab
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal revision proceedings, while the scope of interference is limited, the High Court may reduce the sentence imposed by lower courts when considering factors such as: (1) time already served by the accused; (2) the protracted nature of the trial; (3) the personal circumstances of the accused including his status as sole breadwinner; (4) the absence of pending cases; and (5) the overall ends of justice. The court may impose alternative penalties such as charitable donations coupled with undertakings to refrain from future offences as a substitute for or in addition to imprisonment.
On this section: Supply of copy of Challan to accused; trial court properly supplied copy to petitioner
-
Puvvada Venkata Krishna Murthy vs The State of A.p.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a cheque is issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt and is dishonored due to insufficient funds, the issuer commits an offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The presentation of a cheque on multiple occasions, each resulting in dishonor, constitutes separate causes of action. The presumption under Section 146 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies to validate the fact of dishonor based on the bank's official cheque return memo, and technical errors in the date of the memo (such as a Sunday date) do not invalidate the entire case if the bank has issued an official note confirming dishonor. The absence of cross-examination on key facts (such as the signature on the cheque and promissory note, or the loan amount) and the failure of the accused to adduce defense evidence or testify in his own defense strengthen the case against the accused.
On this section: Compliance requirement before trial - procedure followed by the trial court before examining the accused
-
Adi Malik vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A magistrate cannot record a plea of guilt and convict an accused under Section 241 Cr.P.C. without first complying with the mandatory procedural requirements of Sections 239 and 240 Cr.P.C., which require the magistrate to consider the police report and material and form an opinion that charges should be framed. Failure to comply with these provisions, particularly when coupled with the absence of legal representation for the accused, constitutes a failure of justice that cannot be cured under Section 464 Cr.P.C., and necessitates quashing of the conviction and remittal for fresh proceedings.
On this section: Requirement to supply copy of police report and other documents to the accused - mandatory compliance before proceeding to record plea
-
Sumathi Ravichandran vs The Inspector of Police
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Sanction files containing confidential communications between government departments and authorities are privileged documents under Sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act. An accused person does not have the right to peruse such privileged sanction files, even for purposes of mounting an effective defense. However, the trial court may examine the sanction file to satisfy itself that the sanctioning authority applied its mind to the facts placed before it. This approach balances the accused's right to fair trial with the state's legitimate interest in protecting confidential government communications relating to affairs of state.
On this section: Duty to supply copies of documents to accused; distinguished from access to confidential government files
-
State of Haryana vs Shakir @ Shahrukh, S/o- Jamil
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the prosecution case rests solely on the statements of official police witnesses without any independent corroborating witnesses, the evidence must be subjected to close scrutiny. The prosecution must establish both the actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind) of the accused, along with the causal connection between the alleged criminal acts and the accused person. Mere recovery of contraband articles does not establish the accused's involvement unless the prosecution proves the accused's direct participation in the offence. Procedural compliance, particularly the mandatory requirement to associate independent witnesses during recovery under Section 100(4) Cr.P.C., is essential for the credibility of the prosecution case. In the absence of such compliance and independent corroboration, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt and acquittal.
On this section: Supply of copy of challan to accused person free of cost
-
Mohammad Iliaz vs Mohammad Ghouz
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In a criminal trial, the burden of proof always rests on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. When the prosecution fails to produce crucial documentary evidence such as original trademark certificates, copyright register extracts, and original labels, and when seizure mahazars are not corroborated by attesting witnesses, the prosecution case fails. The accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt when the prosecution cannot establish the essential ingredients of the offence through admissible and corroborated evidence.
On this section: Furnishing copies of final report to accused - Court provided copies of final report to accused as per procedure.
-
State of Haryana vs DHANI
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal law, the burden of proving the guilt of the accused exclusively lies on the prosecution, which must prove the offences charged beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of doubt, if any, must go in favour of the accused. When the prosecution fails to produce eyewitness evidence, best evidence (such as CCTV footage), medical evidence, and forensic evidence despite their availability, and when the testimonies of witnesses are contradictory, hearsay, or hostile, the prosecution has failed to discharge its burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt. In such circumstances, the accused must be acquitted and given the benefit of doubt, as wrongful conviction of an innocent person is far more serious than wrongful acquittal.
On this section: Supply of copies of documents to accused. The court ensured the accused received copies of the challan and accompanying documents.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Compliance with Section 207 . When, in any warrant-case instituted on a police report, the accused appears or is brought before a Magistrate at the commencement of the trial, the Magistrate shall satisfy himself that he has complied with the provisions of Section 207." - 14.To understand these provisions, one has to go back to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as the " CrPC, 1898 "). Section 173 of the CrPC, 1898 fixes the responsibility on the officer in charge of police station to serve a copy of the report of the Police Officer and of the …
-
… The decoding registers are sought to be produced through the representatives of the cellular companies in whose custody or possession they are found. The decoding registers are a relevant piece of evidence to establish the co-relationship between <sup>25</sup> Section 207 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 <sup>207.</sup> Supply to the accused of copy of police report and other documents. In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following:- …
-
… reports from the experts, the Investigating Officer completed the investigation and filed a final report in P.R.C.No. 24 of 2016, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thoothukudi, under Sections 376(2)(l) and 506(i) I.P.C. against the appellant. 5. On appearance of the appellant, the provisions of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were complied with and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Thoothukudi, in S.C.No.324 of 2016 and it was made over to the Fast Track Mahila Court, Thoothukudi, for trial. The Trial Court framed charges against the accused, as detailed in Paragraph No. 2, …
Questions about Section 207
What have the courts held on Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep v. State of Kerala (29 Nov 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Contents of a memory card are a document/electronic record; the accused is entitled to a cloned copy under s.207, subject to privacy conditions (Dileep). Another 15 judgments on this section are set out below, 7 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 207, section 207 CRPC, section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 16 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep v. State of Kerala (29 Nov 2019).
What should I read with Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 154 (Information in cognizable cases), section 161 (Examination of witnesses by police), section 164 (Recording of confessions and statements), section 173 (Report of police officer on completion of investigation), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 230 (Supply to accused of copy of police report and other documents), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 207, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.