The Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court recently ruled that the accused’s constitutional right to a fair trial outweighs the police’s right to privacy. The verdict, delivered on January 7, 2025, in the case of Narendra Kumar Soni v. State of Rajasthan, addressed a challenge to an earlier order where the Special Judge in Kota had partially rejected the petitioner’s request to preserve mobile tower location data of witnesses in a trap case.
The petitioner, who is accused in an anti-corruption case, filed an application under Section 91 of the CrPC to preserve the mobile tower locations of key witnesses, Sonu Meena and Jitender Meena, who were allegedly involved in a trap. The petitioner argued that no trap proceedings occurred on March 10, 2023, and that these two witnesses were falsely implicated. CCTV footage reportedly showed only the petitioner, the complainant's brother, and an unknown person at the scene, contrary to the testimonies of the witnesses.
While the Special Judge had ordered the preservation of mobile tower locations for the complainant and the Investigating Officer, the request for the witnesses’ tower data was denied. The petitioner appealed this decision, asserting that without this evidence, it would be impossible to prove the falsity of the charges.
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, in his analysis, cited precedents such as Kapil v. State of Rajasthan and Suresh Kumar v. Union of India, which recognize the right of the accused to access crucial evidence in support of their defense. The Court observed that call details and tower locations could be essential in verifying the petitioner’s claims, stating, “The right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India in ensuring free and fair investigation/trial would prevail over the right to privacy of the police officials.”
The Court further emphasized that while the right to privacy of police officials is important, it could be limited when it serves the purpose of ensuring justice. “Some extent of privacy can be breached in production of the said call details, as this would facilitate the learned trial Court in discovering the truth and rendering justice, which is fair to all stakeholders,” the judgment stated.
The bench made it clear that failure to preserve mobile tower location data would risk losing crucial evidence forever, which could hinder the discovery of the truth. In light of the Suresh Kumar case (2014), the Court ordered that the tower location data for Sonu Meena and Jitender Meena’s mobile phones, from 1:40 PM to 10:00 PM on March 10, 2023, be preserved. It also stipulated that any call records associated with the numbers be redacted to protect privacy.
The Court noted that such electronic evidence is vital for ensuring a fair trial, stating that denying access to this information would amount to a miscarriage of justice. It highlighted that Section 91 of the CrPC allows for the production of documents that can help the Court ascertain the truth and ensure justice is served.
The petition was partly allowed, with the Trial Court now required to ensure the preservation and production of the tower location data for the witnesses in question.
Picture Source :
