Rakesh Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1955 MP

                                     1
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                    BEFORE
                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                          ON THE 11th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                   CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2522 of 2021

        Between:-
        RAKESH SHARMA S/O SHRI RAMNATH SHARMA ,
        AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SALES
        MANAGER FAST MOVING CONSUMER FOOD 203
        CHANDRIKA   PARISAR     P.S. GORAKHPUR
        (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                  .....PETITIONER
        (BY SHRI GHANSHYAM PANDEY, ADVOCATE)

        AND

        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.
        OMTI JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
        (SHRI S.K. MALVI, LEARNED PANEL LAWYER)
                         (Heard through Video Conferencing)
      Th is revision coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                      ORDER

T h is Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal

Revision 1973 has been filed partially aggrieved by the order dated 31.8.2021 passed in S.T. No. 437/21, whereby court below has declined to hand over the cell phone of the applicant to him on 'supurdagi'.

Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant's application filed under Section 451/457 of Cr.P.C. (IA No.1) was pregnant with twin prayers relating to :-

(i) handing over of vehicle and

(ii) cell phone.

The court below has rightly applied the judgment of the Supreme Court in (2002) 10 SCC 283, (Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujrat) but has committed an error in not providing cell phone on 'supurdagi'.

It is argued that singular reason assigned by the court below is that said mobile contains relevant data. If the mobile is handed over to the applicant, there will be a possibility of tampering with relevant data. Thus, prayer for handing over

of mobile was declined. Shri Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the data of said mobile can be secured by using technology and bare mobile can be handed over to him, so that mobile does not go waste. If data is secured by using technology by the court, the mobile can be utilized by the applicant.

The prayer is opposed by Shri S.K. Malvi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent -State.

The impugned order shows that the mobile is not handed over the applicant for the following reasons by the court below :-

(i) If the mobile is given on 'supurdagi' the applicant may tamper with the data,

(ii) the mobile and its original data will be required at the time of evidence,

(iii) During the course of hearing, Shri Pandey submits that he will not dispose of the mobile. It may be handed over to him after taking out the data. The court may impose necessary conditions for 'supurdagi'.

I find substance in the argument of Shri Pandey. The court below was required to examine this aspect. Accordingly, the order dated 31.8.2021 to the extent it declines the prayer for handing over of mobile is set aside. The court below is required to rehear the parties on the question of handing over of the mobile on 'supurdagi' after securing the data of the mobile, (if possible) and if the court below is satisfied that after taking out the data, the mobile can be handed over on 'supurdagi', it may impose essential conditions while granting the mobile on 'supurdaginama'. The court below needs to examine the aforesaid aspect in accordance with law.

It is expected that the court below will decide this aspect within fifteen days from the date of production of copy of this order.

The M.Cr.C. is disposed of.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE Signature Not Verified bks SAN

Digitally signed by BASANT KUMAR SHRIVAS Date: 2022.02.11 17:01:50 IST