Summary
In the 25 April 2018 follow-up order in Asian Resurfacing, the Supreme Court declined interference with the charge-framing order and directed the trial to proceed, leaving all trial contentions open. To prevent proceedings being stalled by requisition of records, appellate and revisional courts were directed to retain copies and return originals promptly. Future requisitions should ordinarily be met with photocopies or scanned copies, with originals called only when specifically necessary and returned after perusal. The order was to be circulated to all High Courts.
Issues
- Whether the charge-framing order warranted interference after the earlier three-Judge judgment.
- How trial records should be handled to prevent appellate or revisional requisitions from delaying trial.
Held
- After considering the earlier judgment and the record, the Court found no ground to interfere with framing of charge. The trial was to continue, with all parties’ contentions remaining open for the trial court and appearance fixed for 14 May 2018. (¶¶ 2, 3)
- Where original records had already been summoned by an appellate or revisional court, it was to keep photocopies or scanned copies for reference and return the originals to the trial court forthwith. (¶ 4)
- For future requisitions, trial courts could send copies and retain originals so proceedings were not held up. An appellate or revisional court could require originals only on a specific finding that copies would not suffice, and then only for perusal before returning them and retaining copies. (¶ 5)
- The order was directed to be sent to all High Courts. It dealt with continuation of this trial and handling of records, rather than independently restating every direction from the earlier 28 March judgment. (¶¶ 4, 5, 6)
Result
Appeals disposed of; charge-framing order left undisturbed and trial to proceed with contentions open. Directions issued for prompt return and ordinarily copy-based requisition of trial records; circulation to all High Courts.