1 2025:CGHC:9914 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 123 of 2025 Purushottam Pradhan S/o Late Naveen Pradhan Aged About 34 Years R/o Paterapali, Thana And Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh). ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. Amiya Bhushan, Advocate. For State Mr. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 27/02/2025 1. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.08.2024 passed by the Special Judge, (Atrocities Act), Raigarh, C.G, whereby application of the petitioner under Section 497 of BNSS seeking two mobile phones, has been rejected. 2. Relevant facts for disposal of this petition is that victim lodged report against the appellant stating that the appellant has committed forcible sexual intercourse with her under the threat that 2 he will make her obscene video viral. Based on said report, Crime No.161/2024 was registered against the appellant. During course of investigation, two mobile phones alongwith sim cards bearing (sim number 9425299567, 9575767968 and 9926160046) has been seized. For releasing the same, appellant filed an application before the Court below under Section 497 of BNSS, which came to be rejected. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court below has committed an illegality by rejecting the application of the petitioner. On competition of investigation, chargesheet has been filed before the Competent Court and trial has already commenced before the Court. The alleged call details using the petitioner's phone is already part of the charge-sheet. The cell phones are out of use, same would get damage, if it is lying in police custody. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the phones in police custody and, therefore, the said phones be handed over to the petitioner on on the terms and conditions as may be deemed fit by this Court. Learned Counsel also pointed out that petitioner has already been granted bail in Crime No.161/2024 by this Court vide order dated 01/08/2024 passed in CRA No. 957 of 2024. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the contention made by the petitioner and would submit that said seized phones has been sent for examination. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the petitioner is 3 owner of the phones in question and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the said phones in police custody, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case for releasing the seized phones in favour of the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the impugned order Annexure P-1 passed by the Court below is set aside. It is directed that after obtaining the FSL report of the mobile phones in question alongwith sim cards, same be released on Supurdnama in favour of the petitioner on the following conditions: (i) Before release of the mobile phones, the documents pertaining to ownership of the said phones be verified. (ii) Photographs of the mobile phones should be taken and bond should also be produced that the mobile phones alongwith sim cards would be produced as and when required. (iii) Proper security i.e. personal bond of Rs.30,000/- be obtained before release of mobile phones and sim cards. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J.