IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH

th

ON THE 20 OF JANUARY, 2026 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 34 of 2026 LAKSHIT Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Vikas Jain - Advocate for the petitioner [P-1].

Shri Rajendra Singh Suryavanshi - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

ORDER This criminal revision under section 438 & 442 of the BNSS, 2025 is preferred challenging the legality of the order dated 10.12.2025 in SCNDPS No.8133/2024 by Special Judge (NDPS Act, 1985), Mandsaur, whereby in the above mentioned special case arising out of crime no.43/2024 registered at police station, Narcotics Cell, Indore, Prakosth Mandsaur whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 94, 95 of BNSS for calling the cell phone tower location records of the respondent police officers and the accused persons has been rejected.

2. As per prosecution case, the revision petitioner/accused along with co-accused Harish was apprehended at 4.00 p.m of 18.05.2024 near village Beniphati on Daulat-Bhavnagar Road with the contraband 100 gms MD and 50 grams of Opium and the prosecution was initiated.

3. The revision petitioner preferred an application under Section 94, 95 of the BNSS for preservation and calling of call details records (CDR)/Tower location data of accused persons and police officers in bearing Crime No.43/2024 of P.S Narcotics Cell Indore Prakosth Mandsaur (M.P.).

4. The application was opposed by the prosecution and the trial court rejected the application on the ground that call data of the police officers is confidential and cannot be shared with the accused person.

5. Challenging the impugned order, this revision petition has been preferred.

6. On due consideration of submissions and perusal of the documents filed on record, including the application filed by the applicant under Sections 94 of BNSS, 2023 and the subsequent impugned order dated 10.12.2025, it is found that the petitioner's application has been rejected by the learned Judge on the ground that in the application filed by the applicant there are no cogent reasons and facts for calling cell phone location and call details in the interest of justice. This Court, taking note of the fact that the defence of the petitioner is that the aforesaid electronic documents would be necessary to prove the defence and to deny such a document to the petitioner, would be depriving him of fair trial.

7. In view of the same, the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 is hereby set aside and the application filed by the petitioner under Sections 94, 95 of the BNSS, 2023 is hereby allowed and it is directed that the electronic documents required by the petitioner shall be preserved by the concerned authorities and shall be produced as and when the Trial Court directs.

Learned judge of the trial Court is also requested to ensure the preservation of the aforesaid record as desired by the petitioner.

8. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands allowed and disposed of.

(GAJENDRA SINGH)

JUDGE sumathi