Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs Bharath Sankar on 7 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943
CRL.MC NO. 2991 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.06.2021 IN CRL.M.P.NO.890/2021 IN
S.C.NO.556/2020 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1 IN CRL.M.P :
STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, EXCISE ENFORCEMENT
AND ANTI NARCOTIC SPECIAL SQUAD, ERNAKULAM
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
BY ADV.SRI.GRACIOUS KURIAKOSE,
ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 IN CRL.M.P:
1 BHARATH SANKAR,
S/O.JAYABALAKRISHNAN, AGED 19 YEARS,
PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, THEKKETHAZHAM, MANJALI,
KARUMALLOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE 683 511.
2 THE NODAL OFFICER,
BHARATI AIRTEL LIMITED, S.L.AVENUE, N.H. BYEPASS,
KUNDANOOR JUNCTION, MARADU P.O., ERNAKULAM PIN-682 304
3 THE NODAL OFFICER,
IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED, V.J. TOWERS, VYTTILA P.O.,
ERNAKULAM - 682 019
4 THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER,
LEGAL ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY (LEA), BSNL, TELEPHONE
EXCHANGE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 017
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.2991 of 2021
2
ORDER
Dated this the 07th day of September, 2021
This petition is filed challenging an order passed by
Additional Sessions Court-VII, Ernakulam (for short 'the court
below') on 07.06.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.890/2021 in
S.C.No.556/2020.
2. Crl.M.P.No.890/2021 is an application filed by the
learned counsel for the 2nd accused seeking for a direction to
respondents 2 to 4 therein to preserve the call details.
Respondents 2 to 4 are the Nodal Officer, Bharati Airtel Limited,
Ernakulam, the Nodal Officer, IDEA Cellular Limited, Ernakulam
and the Divisional Engineer, Legal Enforcement Authority (LEA)
BSNL, Telephone Exchange, Ernkulam.
3. The grievance of the respondent was that the
subscribers of the mobile phone numbers, with reference to
which details are sought to be preserved, were not heard before
passing the impugned order. The learned Additional Director
General of Prosecutions has contended that the subscribers
Crl.M.C.No.2991 of 2021
have a right to be heard before passing an order affecting their
rights. The judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in
Crl.M.C No. 53 of 2021 passed on 09.07.2021 was also relied
on to fortify the argument. According to him the impugned
order suffers for violating the principles of natural justice.
4. It is noticed from the application filed before the
court below, seeking to preserve details, direction is sought to
respondents 2 to 4. The counsel representing respondents 2 to
4 has contended that as per the Rules and Licence issued to
them, the call details unless preserved will only be available for
one year and after that, the same will be lost. The court below
having been convinced of the need for preservation of the
details, issued direction to respondents 2 to 4 to do so by the
impugned order.
5. The trial in the case may not start within one year.
Therefore, if a direction is not issued to preserve it, the details
will not be available for trial. The details sought to be
preserved include those with reference to the mobile phones of
the Investigating Officers also. Therefore, when a demand for
Crl.M.C.No.2991 of 2021
production of the details is made, the court below shall see that
the affected parties are also heard, prior to passing of any
orders.
Crl.M.C is disposed of with direction issued to the court
below as above.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH
JUDGE
NAB
Crl.M.C.No.2991 of 2021
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2991/2021
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE:
ANNEXURE A THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
7.6.2021 IN CRL. M.P.890/2021 IN
S.C.NO.556/2020 IN THE COURT OF THE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-VII,
ERNAKULAM
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P A TO JUDGE
