NARENDER KUMAR vs STATE GNCTD OF DELHI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~83 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 25.03.2025 + CRL.M.C. 1663/2025 & CRL.M.A. 7511/2025 (exemption) NARENDER KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Counsel for petitioner (appearance not given) versus STATE GNCTD OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP for State with IO ASI Nimmo, PS Naraina CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has challenged order dated 23.12.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court dismissing his application under Section 91 Cr.P.C in case FIR No. 12/2021 of PS Kirti Nagar for offences under Sections 323/342/376/376(2)(n)/34 IPC and Section 6/21 of POCSO Act. 2. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that in the proceedings arising out of the above mentioned FIR, the Investigating Officer filed a supplementary chargesheet along with uncertified CDRs of mobile phone numbers held by the accused Ravi Rao and suspects Raja, Vicky and Akash. The petitioner, facing trial in the said case moved an application seeking copies of the said CDRs, which application was dismissed by the learned Trial Court, holding that the said documents do not have even remote relevance to the defence of the accused persons. CRL.M.C. 1663/2025 Page 1 of 2 pages Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:25.03.2025 18:48:49 3. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that it is the prerogative of the defence counsel to decide about the defence to be taken. Further, it is contended that in order to ensure effective defence, the copies of all documents filed with the chargesheet must be provided to the accused. 4. The Investigating Officer SI Manjeet has not appeared and is stated to be appearing today in court of the Registrar, according to SI Sonika of PS Kirti N