92 “187. Therefore, a Public Prosecutor has wider set of duties than to merely ensure that the accused is punished, the duties of ensuring fair play in the proceedings, all relevant facts are brought before the court in order for the determination of truth and justice for all the parties including the victims. It must be noted that these duties do not allow the Prosecutor to be lax in any of his duties as against the accused.” 172. In Manu Sharma, the appellants in question had argued that the right to fair trial included a wide duty of disclosure on the public prosecutor, such that non-disclosure of any evidence – whether or not relied upon by the prosecution – must be made available to the defence. This court considered Section 207 and 208 CrPC, Rule 1677 of the Bar Council of India Rules (which is limited to evidence on which prosecutor proposes to rely on), and English law. The common law position culled out was that subject to exceptions like sensitive information and public interest immunity, the prosecution should disclose any material which might be exculpatory to the defense. Such a position, however, was not accepted by this court, in its totality. It was held that such obligations are on a different footing in India, given the fundamental canons of our criminal jurisprudence founded on Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution, which require not just the investigating agency, but also courts in their own independent field, to ensure that investigation is fair and does not hamper the individual’s freedom, except in accordance with law, i.e., ensure adherence to the rule of law. Relevant extracts that merit repetition: “199. It is not only the responsibility of the investigating agency but as well as that of the courts to ensure that investigation is fair and does not in any way hamper the freedom of an individual except in accordance with law. Equally enforceable canon of the criminal law is that the high responsibility lies upon the investigating agency not to conduct an investigation in tainted and unfair manner. The investigation should not prima facie be indicative of a biased mind and every effort should be made to bring the guilty to law as nobody stands above law dehors his position and influence in the society. **** 77 Rule 16 of the Chapter II, Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules under the Advocates Act, 1961: “16. An advocate appearing for the prosecution in a criminal trial shall so conduct the prosecution that it does not lead to conviction of the innocent. The suppression of material capable of establishing the innocence of the accused shall be scrupulously avoided.”