Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

40. At the hearing on 14th November, 2017, a status report handed over by the CBI in Court was given to Mr. Gonsalves for his perusal and was thereafter returned by him to the counsel for the CBI.

41. At the hearing on 21st December, 2017, another status report was submitted, in which, inter alia, it was stated that the report of the CFSL, Chandigarh on the forensic examinations of the mobile phones for the deleted data was awaited. The Court directed the CBI to send a reminder to the CFSL, Chandigarh to expedite the submission of their report. The Court was also shown a copy of the order dated 21st November, 2017 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) disposing of the application filed by the CBI seeking permission to subject the nine persons to polygraph test. The learned ACMM observed that the consent required of such persons for that purpose was not forthcoming.

43. On 2nd April, 2018, the Court noted that a report had been sent by the CFSL, Chandigarh, to the CBI of examination of only three of the mobile phones. Even that part of the report was found to be incomplete. It was noted that going by the status report filed on that date in the Court, the CBI itself had reservations about the incomplete report in respect of three mobile phones since the task had been entrusted to a junior level officer of CFSL, Chandigarh, who did not appear to be appropriately qualified or experienced to undertake the task. The Court took serious note of the laxity on the part of the CFSL, Chandigarh, and directed that in the event that the complete report of the analysis of the nine mobile phones undertaken by the CFSL, Chandigarh by a senior level officer qualified for the task, is not made available to the IO of the CBI on or before 30th April 2018, the Director, CFSL, Chandigarh would remain present in person in this Court on the next date to explain the lapse.

44. The case was next heard on 11th May, 2018. The Court noted in its order of that date as under:

"1. Mr. Nikhil Goel, learned counsel for the CBI, has presented the 8th status report.

2. Nine mobile phones were sent by the CBI to the CFSL in Chandigarh for extraction of the data contained therein. While the data of two of the mobile phones was sent to the CBI, the data of the remaining seven was awaited as of the last date of hearing of this petition. The report dated 25th April 2018 of the CFSL, Chandigarh states that data from four mobile phones and two SD-cards were retrieved. Approximately 122 gigabytes of data has been recovered. This includes thousands of distinct files (7,907 audio files, 1,440 video files, 4,015 text messages, 3,870 WhatsApp files, 1,14,488 image files, 29,608 SD-card files, 20,717 miscellaneous files) and a 36,401-page Extraction Report. This data is now available to the CBI. Mr. Goel informs the Court that while the analysis of this exhaustive data is a work in progress, the CBI is yet to fine concrete leads in respect of the persons specifically named by the Petitioner.

3. As regards the three phones which are referred to, as Exhibits M-1, M-6 and M-7, the CFSL report states that Ex M-1 could not be analysed since it was not unlocked, i.e. it is protected with a pattern lock. The other two mobile phones, i.e. Exs. M-6 and M-7, are not in working order and, therefore, could not be analysed.

4. On instructions, Mr. Goel states that through a Special Messenger, the CBI will send the aid three mobile phones, i.e. Exs. M-1, M-6 and M-7, to the CFSL, Hyderabad no later than three days from today. The Court requests the CFSL Hyderabad to examine the said mobile phones, make every effort to retrieve the data therein and submit a report to the CBI no later than one month thereafter.