SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SC) 1486

SURYA KANT, UJJAL BHUYAN
Tarun Sharma @ Vipul – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent


Table of Content
1. appellants' entitlement to preserve cdrs. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. state's argument on timing of preservation plea. (Para 5)
3. consideration of cdr relevance and potential prejudice. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. court's directive on preservation of cdrs. (Para 9 , 10)
5. evidence relevance determined by the trial court. (Para 11)

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The short issue that arises for consideration in the instant appeal is whether the appellants, who are facing trial under Sections 302 , 147, 148, 149, 34 and 506 of the IPC, are entitled to seek preservation of the Call Data Records ('CDRs'), with tower location etc./CCTV footage, of the prosecution witnesses cited in the charge-sheet, for the period of 14.01.2023 to 20.01.2023.

3. The Trial Court as well as the High Court have turned down the appellants' prayer primarily on the ground that such a plea will be maintainable at the time when they will lead their defence evidence.

4. On the other hand, the case of the appellants is that as per the Rules framed by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ('TRAI'), the mobile companies are obligated to preserve the CDRs for a period of two years only, and since the relevant period is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top