Sudhir Singh v. State
$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + SUDHIR SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Dhananjay Kaushal and Mr. Tushar Kantiwal, Advocates versus STATE .....Respondent Through:
Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI PR Hudda
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
O R D E R
% 20.05.2019 CRL.M.A. 10807/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 2703/2019 & CRL.M.A. 10808/2019 Petitioner's application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. for preservation and production of the call detail records of mobile phones, as referred to in Para- 6 of this petition, has been declined by trial court vide order of 1st May, 2019 without giving any tangible reasons. The details of the mobile phones sought by petitioner are as under:- Sr. No.
Mobile No.
Service Provider a.
9899309575 Vodafone b.
9250503594 Not known
c.
7011383924 Reliance Jio d.
9250446645 Not known e.
9873050180 Vodafone Learned counsel for petitioner submits that service providers retain the records of the mobile phones for a period of thirteen months and so, it is necessary to direct the service providers in question to atleast retain the records of the aforesaid mobile numbers.
Mr. M.S.Oberoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State supports the impugned order. Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, I find that without going into the relevance of call detail records of the mobile phones in question, it would be appropriate to direct service providers of these mobile phones numbers i.e.
9899309575;
9250503594;
7011383924; 9250446645 and 9873050180 to retain the records, if not already deleted. Let it be so done by concerned service providers forthwith.
Without going into the aspect of relevance of records in question, impugned order is accordingly modified, while leaving it open to the trial court to consider the relevance aspect. Let trial court ensure that the concerned service providers are put to notice at the earliest, to ensure preservation of the call records in question, if not already deleted and to produce it before the trial court, if directed. Trial court shall be apprised of this order forthwith to ensure compliance.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master.
(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MAY 20, 2019 v