Gaurav Tyagi v. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been preferred against order dated 15.04.2025, passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad in Case No. 1739 of 2023 (Gaurav Tyagi Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No.86 of 2018, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, P.S.- Link Road, District- Ghaziabad, whereby an application filed by applicant-accused for summoning of call detail record has been rejected.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is facing trial in the aforesaid case and that in order to prove his defence version, the call detail records of applicant and his father as well as some police officials are required but the application of applicant was rejected. The applicant has preferred a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court, wherein by order dated 06.02.2025 this Court has directed that applicant would be extended one more opportunity for leading evidence in the shape of call detail record. It was submitted that said order of this Court has been misinterpreted by the trial Court and prayer for summoning the said call detail record was rejected by impugned order dated 15.04.2025. Learned counsel submitted that applicant, being a private person, can not obtain call detail record and thus it was prayed that said call detail record be summoned from the concerned telecom company but the learned trial Court has not made any such direction and by impugned order applicant was granted opportunity to produce the call detail record within a period of one month. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon case of Areeb Ejaz Majeed Vs. National Investigation Agency 2019 2 AIR (Bom)(R)(Cri) 284. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that impugned order is against law as well as against direction of this Court and thus liable to be quashed.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

6. In the instant matter it appears that applicant is accused in the aforesaid case and in defence evidence, he has moved an application to summon mobile phone call detail record of himself and of his father, as well as of concerned police officials, in his defence. Earlier, the application of applicant was rejected by the trial Court. The applicant has challenged the same by filing a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein by order dated 06.02.2025, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has observed as under:- "8. After having the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for parties, a single opportunity may be extended in favour of petitioner for leading the evidences and if the same can be restored or produced by the prosecution, the same has to be exercised by learned trial court concerned within stipulated period of time.

9. The abovementioned extension is granted in favour of petitioner only on the basis of justice done to the parties and no person may be prejudiced by way of not extending the opportunities for proving his or her innocence.

10. In view thereof, learned trial court concerned is hereby directed to extend one more opportunity for leading evidences specifically in shape of CDR and location as mentioned in the application dated 19.11.2019 preferred at the behest of petitioner within a specified period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before it, if in any case, either any parties, failed to produce evidence, learned trial court concerned will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law leading finalization of trial.

11. If in case, the evidence as desired by petitioner/accused be laid by the prosecution, the same has to be proved by way of giving proper opportunity prescribed at law. Prosecution as well as defence is hereby requested to render entire support for achieving the direction as made above.

12. With the said directions, the instant petition is hereby disposed of. "

7. It is apparent from aforesaid order that the trial Court was directed to extend one more opportunity for leading evidence in the shape of call detail record and it appears that prosecution was also permitted to produce such evidence. Though, the learned trial Court has granted opportunity to the parties to produce call detail record and CCTV footage in terms of order dated 06.02.0225, passed by this Court, but it has been pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant that concerned telecom company can not provide call detail records at the instance of applicant and thus the same has to be summoned by the trial Court. It goes without saying that right to lead defence evidence is an important statutory right provided to the accused in criminal trial. Considering facts of the matter and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it appears in the interest of justice that the call detail records, as sought by applicant vide application dated 19.11.2019, must be summoned by the trial Court from the concerned telecom company.

8. In view of aforesaid, it is directed that the trial Court shall summon call detail records and location of mobile phone numbers, as mentioned in application dated

19.11.2019 filed by the applicant, from the concerned telecom company, in exercise of powers under Section 91 Cr.P.C. read with Section 243(2) Cr.P.C., within a period of 45 days from receipt of copy of this order. The impugned order dated

15.04.2025, passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad stands altered to this extent.

9. The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 30.7.2025 'SP'/-

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been preferred against order dated 15.04.2025, passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad in Case No. 1739 of 2023 (Gaurav Tyagi Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No.86 of 2018, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, P.S.- Link Road, District- Ghaziabad, whereby an application filed by applicant-accused for summoning of call detail record has been rejected.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is facing trial in the aforesaid case and that in order to prove his defence version, the call detail records of applicant and his father as well as some police officials are required but the application of applicant was rejected. The applicant has preferred a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court, wherein by order dated 06.02.2025 this Court has directed that applicant would be extended one more opportunity for leading evidence in the shape of call detail record. It was submitted that said order of this Court has been misinterpreted by the trial Court and prayer for summoning the said call detail record was rejected by impugned order dated 15.04.2025. Learned counsel submitted that applicant, being a private person, can not obtain call detail record and thus it was prayed that said call detail record be summoned from the concerned telecom company but the learned trial Court has not made any such direction and by impugned order applicant was granted opportunity to produce the call detail record within a period of one month. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon case of Areeb Ejaz Majeed Vs. National Investigation Agency 2019 2 AIR (Bom)(R)(Cri) 284. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that impugned order is against law as well as against direction of this Court and thus liable to be quashed.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

6. In the instant matter it appears that applicant is accused in the aforesaid case and in defence evidence, he has moved an application to summon mobile phone call detail record of himself and of his father, as well as of concerned police officials, in his defence. Earlier, the application of applicant was rejected by the trial Court. The applicant has challenged the same by filing a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein by order dated 06.02.2025, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has observed as under:- "8. After having the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for parties, a single opportunity may be extended in favour of petitioner for leading the evidences and if the same can be restored or produced by the prosecution, the same has to be exercised by learned trial court concerned within stipulated period of time.

9. The abovementioned extension is granted in favour of petitioner only on the basis of justice done to the parties and no person may be prejudiced by way of not extending the opportunities for proving his or her innocence.

10. In view thereof, learned trial court concerned is hereby directed to extend one more opportunity for leading evidences specifically in shape of CDR and location as mentioned in the application dated 19.11.2019 preferred at the behest of petitioner within a specified period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before it, if in any case, either any parties, failed to produce evidence, learned trial court concerned will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law leading finalization of trial.

11. If in case, the evidence as desired by petitioner/accused be laid by the prosecution, the same has to be proved by way of giving proper opportunity prescribed at law. Prosecution as well as defence is hereby requested to render entire support for achieving the direction as made above.

12. With the said directions, the instant petition is hereby disposed of. "

7. It is apparent from aforesaid order that the trial Court was directed to extend one more opportunity for leading evidence in the shape of call detail record and it appears that prosecution was also permitted to produce such evidence. Though, the learned trial Court has granted opportunity to the parties to produce call detail record and CCTV footage in terms of order dated 06.02.0225, passed by this Court, but it has been pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant that concerned telecom company can not provide call detail records at the instance of applicant and thus the same has to be summoned by the trial Court. It goes without saying that right to lead defence evidence is an important statutory right provided to the accused in criminal trial. Considering facts of the matter and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it appears in the interest of justice that the call detail records, as sought by applicant vide application dated 19.11.2019, must be summoned by the trial Court from the concerned telecom company.

8. In view of aforesaid, it is directed that the trial Court shall summon call detail records and location of mobile phone numbers, as mentioned in application dated

19.11.2019 filed by the applicant, from the concerned telecom company, in exercise of powers under Section 91 Cr.P.C. read with Section 243(2) Cr.P.C., within a period of 45 days from receipt of copy of this order. The impugned order dated

15.04.2025, passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad stands altered to this extent.

9. The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 30.7.2025 'SP'/-