CRL O.P No. 7841 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-06-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 7841 of 2025 State Rep. By DSP Of Police CBI ACV New Delhi RC 2232020A0001 ... Petitioner Vs 1. Sanjay Jain S/o.Late Bir Kumar Jain 17/71, Punjabi Bagh West Delhi-110026 2.Sukash Chandrashekhar S/o.Late Vijayan Chandrashekhar House No.21, Ls Casa, East Coast Road, Chennai. ... Respondents PRAYER Criminal Original Petition under Section 528 of BNSS 2023 call for the records of the case pertaining to CC.No.25/2024 from the court of Ld. Special Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanchipuram District at Chengalpattu and set aside the impugned order dated 25/09/2024 passed in CRL.M.P.No.399/2024 by Learned Special Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate at Chengalpattu and pass necessary order allowing the petitioner/prosecution to supply copies of D-46 AND D-49 by covering the phone numbers (first 6 digits) arising out of incoming/outgoing calls, reflected in the CDRs, in the interest of national security. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL O.P No. 7841 of 2025 For Petitioner : Mr.K.Srinivasan, Special Public Prosecutor For CBI Cases For Respondents : Mr.R.Sreedhar - for R1 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition is filed challenging the order dated 25.09.2024 made in Crl.M.P.No.399 of 2024 by the learned Special Judge / Chief Judicial Magistrate at Chengalpattu. By the said order, the request of the prosecution to supply copies of the documents that are produced as Document Nos.46 and 49 by redacting the first six digits of the phone numbers of incoming and outgoing calls stood rejected by the trial Court. 2. The case of the prosecution is that in the course of investigation of the complaint, an allegation is also made that from the land-line in 91-011- 23012312, a person claiming and introducing himself as the Law Secretary from the Prime Minister's Office, New Delhi, offered help in obtaining a loan of Rs.2 Crores in lieu of illegal gratification of Rs.20 Lakhs. In the course of investigation, the investigating officer has unearthed that no such call emanated from the said land-line number, which is attached to the Prime Minister's Office. Therefore, the said document is produced only to fortify the said fact. In the process, when the call details of the particular date is produced, all the telephone numbers to which calls are made from the 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL O.P No. 7841 of 2025 Prime Minister's Office would be there in the said list. The said numbers would be official numbers and certain confidential calls regarding the administration of the country would have also been made. Every detail need not be furnished to the accused. Therefore, the prayer that was made for the said documents need not be furnished to the accused and even if it is furnished, it can be furnished only by redacting the first six digits in all the numbers. The said request was rejected by the trial Court and hence the prosecution is before this Court. 3. I have heard Mr.K.Srinivasan, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Sreedhar, learned counsel for the first respondent. Earlier, after hearing both sides, this Court requested the learned counsel for the petitioner to come up with instructions whether the portions of the document can be redacted so as to serve both the purposes of the accused as well as the purpose of maintaining the confidentiality. In view thereof, written instructions are received, in which, on behalf of the petitioner, it is stated as follows: " 12. Subsequently on 08.12.2022, the CBI filed an application requesting the Trial Court to keep the CDRs (D- 46 and D-49) under sealed cover for perusal of Court only, 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL O.P No. 7841 of 2025 without supplying copies to the accused persons on the ground that unrelated phone numbers mentioned in the CDRs, could be misused. Later on, CBI filed application before the learned CJM Court, Chengalpet mentioning that, if required, redacted copies of the CDRs could be provided to the accused persons. However, the learned Trial Court vide order dated 25.09.2024 dismissed the application of CBI (in Crl.MP No.399/2024). 13. Aggrieved from the impugned order dated 25.09.2024 of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chengalpet, CBI preferred an application before the Hon'ble Madras High Court for setting aside the said impugned order dated 25.09.2025. In the said application, CBI also prayed for a direction to supply of copies of the CDRs (D-46 and D-49) masking the initial six digits of the phone numbers, in the interest of National Security." 4. I am of the view that once the document is produced before the trial Court and the prosecution intends to rely upon the same, the document has to be necessarily furnished to the accused. However, when the purpose of the prosecution for which the document is relied upon can be satisfied 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL O.P No. 7841 of 2025 even by redacting the first six digits and showing the last 3 or 4 digits and when the last 3 or 4 digits does not match with the particular number to which the call is said to have been made, then the purpose of the prosecution can very well be achieved, at the same time maintaining the confidentiality. Accordingly, the same will not in any manner prejudice the accused, as the accused can very well cross examine the witness with reference to the phone call that is received with reference to the number. 5. In view thereof, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed on the following terms: (a) The prosecution shall take back the sealed cover containing D-46 and D-49 and submit fresh copies by duly redacting the six digits of all incoming and outgoing call details to the trial Court, which shall be furnish to the accused. (b) By this order, none of the defences of the accused are dealt with and the accused can cross examine the witness with reference to the correctness or otherwise of the call details, which is otherwise available to the accused. 18-06-2025 Neutral Citation : Yes/No KST 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL O.P No. 7841 of 2025 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY J. KST To 1. Special Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanchipuram District at Chengalpattu. 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. CRL OP No. 7841 of 2025 18-06-2025 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis