Section 94 BNSS Is 'Supplementary Tool' For Seeking Production Of Documents During Probe To Prevent Failure Of Justice: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has held that the objective of Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) is to confer power to seek production of evidence deemed relevant for conducting of investigation, and which are not already on record.
Justice Tirthankar Ghosh held: "The ultimate object behind Section 94 of BNSS is to confer power in the hands of the Court or in case of pending investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceedings to produce document or other thing which the Court or the police authorities deems relevant and cogent for conducting of investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceedings and which are not already on record or are required for the purposes of investigation. Thus, it is a supplementary power available for unearthing truth in course of investigation/inquiry/trial or other proceedings for preventing failure of justice."
The petitioners challenged the notice under Section 94 of BNSS issued by the Investigating Officer, directing the Registrar of Swami Vivekananda University (Petitioner No.2) to provide the records of all students who received government scholarships from the institution for the last five academic years (2020 to 2025).
The case relates to a complaint where it was alleged that the Centre-in-Charge for Exams at the University, organised mass use of unfair means, organised leakage of question paper of the Exam during May 2025 and also Semester Examinations of West Bengal State Council of Technical and Vocational Education and Skill Development.
Since the Centre-in-Charge, observer and assisting staff are public servants performing a statutory duty, their acts constitute criminal misconduct by public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the complaint, which has been treated to be the First Information Report of the instant case, alleges large-scale examination malpractice, criminal conspiracy and corruption that vitiated the exams.
It was contended that on 25.07.2025 the Respondent No. 3 issued a notice under Section 94 of BNSS, 2023 to the petitioners thereby seeking records of all students who received government scholarships from the petitioner No. 1 for the period 2020 to 2025.
Senior Advocate thereafter, made a comparison of Section 94 of the BNSS, 2023, along with Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 emphasizing on the phrase “is necessary or desirable for the purpose of any investigation”.
It was argued that a notice under Section 94 of BNSS, 2023 for production of any documents can be sent only when its production is necessary or desirable for the purpose of any investigation. According, to the petitioners, there is no nexus and or link between the institute where the alleged offence has taken place and the University.
The investigating agency cannot make a roving inquiry by misusing powers under Section 94 of BNSS, thereby seeking information/documents which are not at all connected with the case registered, as such the impugned notice under Sections 94 of the BNSS should be quashed.
Counsel for the State submitted that on the basis of a specific complaint by Gopi Bondhu Ganguly, a preliminary enquiry was conducted by Mohanpur Police Station and thereafter, on specific materials having surfaced, a case was registered for investigation under the relevant provisions of BNS, 2023.
On behalf of the State, it was contended that during the course of investigation, it revealed that large-scale educational scam was carried out under the guise of educational scholarships to undeserving students. It further revealed in course of investigation, that Regent Institute of Science and Technology and Swami Vivekananda University are run by the same Trustee as such the malpractice which is the basic allegations for obtaining government scholarships by undeserving students, are being worked out by the investigating agency.
Another angle which is being investigated by the investigating agency is towards assessing whether any financial benefit in the name of scholarships is derived by the College and University.
On the basis of the materials so collected by the investigating agency, the Investigation Officer issued a notice under Section 94 of BNSS to Registrar of Swami Vivekananda University for production of certain documents. The statutory provisions do empower the investigating authority to issue such notices as would be transparent from the provisions of Section 94 of the BNSS.
After delving into the scope of Section 94 BNSS and having considered that the main emphasis of the petitioners was to justify that there was no requirement or desirability in calling for the records which were referred to in the notice under Section 94 of the BNSS, the court was of the view that the materials which have been collected in course of the investigation, as is reflected from the case diary, prima facie satisfies the requirement in respect of the documents called for by the investigating officer of the case.
"To assign further reason relating to the cause of such justification would be interfering with the investigation itself, which would be transgressing to a domain which is not called for while exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India," the court held.
Accordingly, it dismissed the plea.
Case: Swami Vivekananda University & Anr. -versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case No: W.P.A. No. 17617 of 2025