Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kalu @ Karansingh Nayara vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 May, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 3rd OF MAY, 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1690 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
KALU @ KARANSINGH NAYARA S/O GANDA NAYARA, AGED ABOUT 32
YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABORER VILLAGE DHAWADA, P.S. VARLA
DISTRICT BARWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI GIRISH DESAI, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER
THROUGH POLICE STATION VARLA DISTRICT BARWANI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AMIT RAWAL, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This revision coming on for order this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The applicant / accused has filed the present revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the order dated 06.04.2023 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Sendhwa in Sessions Trial No.69/2019, whereby the application for calling the CDR and mobile location of the Investigating Officer Dinesh -2- Singh Kushwaha from 18.01.2019 and 19.01.2019 has been dismissed
02. The applicant is facing sessions trial along with other accused persons. The trial is at the stage of defence evidence. The Investigating Officer has already been examined as well as cross-examined. Now the applicant has filed an application stating that CDR and mobile location of Investigation Officer be called in order to ascertain his location during the investigation. The application was opposed and the same was rejected. Hence, the present revision is before this Court.
03. Shri Desai, learned counsel for the applicant submits that CDR and mobile location is important piece of evidence in order to prove the innocence of the applicant. The applicant along with 10 accused persons have falsely been implicated for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
04. The trial Court has dismissed the application on the ground that the CDR will disclose other information like name, number and address of the complainant, informant and personal liberty of the Investigating Officer.
05. Even otherwise, as per the guidelines of the Ministry of Communication, Department of Telecommunication dated 21.12.2021 issued to all unified licenses to maintain the CDR / IPDR including internet telephone services for the minimum period of two years. Period of two years had already been expired and the service provider is not supposed to keep the record beyond the period of two years. Hence, at this stage no direction can be issued. The applicant ought to have filed this application for preserving CDR and mobile location at the beginning of the trial. After cross-examination of the Investigating and -3- at the stage of defence evidence, the application has rightly been dismissed. I do not find any reason to entertain this criminal revision.
In view of the above, Criminal Revision stands dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Ravi Digitally signed by VINDESH RAIKWAR Date: 2023.05.04 17:45:43 +05'30'