Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

e. The bulk of the official documents were on Kinnaur projects and so were the videos. I could not find any audio which could be played. Some of the files were found to be corrupted.

After this 1 also found a report No.1845/SFSL/Digital/109/25 which appears as docket at serial number in the forwarding letter. This is the data extracted from a mobile phone whose IMEI numbers are given but it is not clear as to whom these phone numbers Belong to (Annexure-X). There is a chat between Nanta HC and Sandeep Vashisht, Agniaditya- 2006, Ashok Dhauta and Anoop Kumar dated 20.03.2025. In this chat, there is talk about hash value of pen drive, regarding seizure of pen drive, unique number of pen drive and alarmingly on "date of modification of file and folders, software changed in that case and same shall be the date of copy files". There is incomplete data of chat and there is talk in the chat about "copy", "pen drive बदला जा सकता है मटे रयल copy करने के बाद" and "date of modification of file folders changed in that case and same shall be the date of copy files." At another place there is talk of whether pen drive should be changed or not. Interestingly, all this chat is going on 20.03.2025, 1 day prior to formatting of pen drive in question above. It is reiterated that due to the volume of data provided by the SFSL it has not been possible to go through each and everything. In fact, two sealed envelopes possibly with pen drives 25 ( 2025:HHC:15455 ) could not even be opened and, in the DVD, pertaining to docket at Sr.No.I only data related to pen drive could be examined to the extent possible and that relating to laptop could not even be examined. Another point to note in that in the report pertaining to docket Sr. No. 3 in which mobile chats have been found the report says that clue in chats "pen drive" and clue "Vimal Negi" were used to get those data wherein chat regarding copying/altering/ replacing pen drive has been displayed as discussed above. However, mother procedure adopted in some organizations is to get a cloned copy of a digital device to the investigator and try to find data using more clues or "key words" because the I.O. knows best about the case on which 'clues' or 'key word' to use. In that sense the report may still not be complete where it is required to allow application of more 'clues' to find relevant data. There is enormous digital data that has been collected by the SIT and only investigator knows what is relevant to the case.