IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) CRM-M-36767-2023 (O&M)

(2) CRM-M-40955-2023 SURESH CHAND MEENA ...Petitioner Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THR. ITS DIRECTOR AND ANOTHER ...Respondent Date of decision: July 02, 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. H.S. Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Akashdeep Singh, S.P.P., CBI.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) CRM-22812-2025 and CRM-22794-2025 The instant applications have been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for placing on record order dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Special Judge, CBI, SAS Nagar.

In view of the averments made in the instant applications, the same are allowed and Annexure P-1 is taken on record.

CRM-22813-2025 and CRM-22795-2025 The instant applications have been filed under Section 528 BNSS seeking advancement of the date of hearing in the main case.

Notice in the applications.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Akashdeep Singh, S.P.P., CBI accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-CBI.

In view of the averments made in the applications, the same are allowed, and the main cases are taken on board today itself.

Main case

1. The instant petitions have been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking issuance of directions to summon and preserve call details, tower location and CAF (application form) of Phone No.97792-41203, 73555-22555 of Jio, 99885-54439, 96901-66661 and 97800-23219 of VI, 98762-24788 of Airtel for the period from 01.08.2021 to 30.09.2021 for effective cross examination of the prosecution witnesses by way of setting aside the impugned order dated 16.11.2022 (Annexure P-6) arising out of FIR No.RC0052021A0021 dated 03.09.2021 under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at CBI, ACB, Chandigarh. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned trial Court erred in mechanically rejecting the application dated 01.12.2021 (Annexure P-4), without proper consideration or hearing. The said application sought a direction for summoning and preserving call records relating to the following individuals: -

(i) The complainant, (ii) Jagtar Singh (father of the complainant), (iii) Gurvinder Singh, Deputy Chief Engineer, (iv) Naresh Kumar, Inspector, CBI, ACB, Chandigarh, (v) Suresh Singh Rathore, Verifying Officer.

3. It is argued that the FIR in the instant case is based significantly on telephonic communication, and therefore, the preservation and production of CDRs of the above individuals is imperative for ensuring a fair trial and for effective cross-examination of prosecution witnesses.

4. Learned counsel submits that the right to a fair trial includes the right to obtain exculpatory evidence and delay in seeking such CDRs could result in the loss of crucial material due to the two-year retention limit prescribed under Telecom Regulations.

5. Specific emphasis has been laid by the learned counsel on the call records of Gurvinder Singh for the period from 01.08.2021 to 30.09.2021, alleging that he was actively associated with the complainant and the Investigating Officer and was involved in the functioning of the relevant Department (RCF).

6. Per contra, learned Standing counsel for the CB, while opposing the petition, submits that the present plea is both legally untenable and factually misconceived. It has been pointed out that the earlier application of the petitioner under Section 91 Cr.P.C. was duly considered and rejected vide a reasoned order dated 16.11.2022 by the learned trial Court, which attained finality as the petitioner did not challenge the said order through revision or appeal.

7. It has been further argued by the learned Standing counsel for the CBI that the present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after 8 months of the order of the learned trial Court is a disguised attempt to reopen issues already adjudicated and amounts to the abuse of the process of law.

8. On merits, it has bee