Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973–Secs. 207 & 173(6)–Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967–Sec. 44–Trial Court allowed the application u/s. 173(6) seeking the declaration of certain witnesses as protected witnesses and statements of these witnesses were kept in a sealed cover–Thereafter, the application u/s. 207 filed praying for a redacted copy of statements of these protected witnesses–Trial Court allowed the application with the opinion that while declaring the witnesses protected, it was nowhere observed that the accused were precluded from obtaining the copies of statements of those protected witnesses–Whether it amounts to review the earlier order ?–Held, no–It was the exercise of powers at two different stages of proceedings under two different provisions–Further held, the order could not have been challenged in appeal by the respondents being in nature of an interlocutory order–Furthermore, the order permitted only redaction of the address and particulars of the witnesses which could disclose their identities–Order passed by the trial Court was fair and reasonable for the prosecution and defence–It deserves to be restored.
