Provide call detail record to accused in drug case, HC directs police
After the perusal of the materials and submissions, the judge wrote that the petitioner was facing a serious offence and wanted to establish his innocence.
Representative Image
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court directed police personnel to furnish their call detail record (CDR), which was sought by a drug accused to defend his case. It also directed the lower court to mark it as an evidence during the trial.
Justice N Anand Venkatesh heard the petition of Dinesh Kumar, who was arrested for allegedly being found in possession of ecstasy tablets (synthetic drug) for commercial purposes, moved the HC seeking to direct the lower court to furnish the police personnel’s CDR.
After the perusal of the materials and submissions, the judge wrote that the petitioner was facing a serious offence and wanted to establish his innocence, an application under section 91 Cr.PC can be filed at any stage of the proceedings depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Considering the fact that the CDR will be available only for two years and thereafter it will be effaced, there is a necessity to call for those details at the earliest, wrote the judge. Hence, the judge quashed the lower court’s order denying to furnish the details and also directed the lower court to mark the CDR as evidence and complete the trial within three months.
The petitioner submitted that on May 25, 2022, Royapuram police station sub-inspector R Selvakumar, constables Senthilkumar and Saravanan called him through his mobile and asked him to come to Foreshore Estate, however he denied to go there.
Subsequently the same day, the police personnel barged into his house and nabbed him and his friend illegally, said the petitioner. The next day the police personnel booked a foisted narcotics case against him and his friend. The petitioner denied the seizure of drugs from him by the police. Further, the petitioner filed a petition in a special court seeking to direct the police personnel to furnish their CDR to prove his innocence and it is a foisted case. However, the lower court dismissed the plea on the ground that the petitioner cannot file such an application even before the examination of witnesses on the side of the prosecution.
