- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Accused Can't Seek Trial Court's...
Accused Can't Seek Trial Court's Direction To Prosecuting Agency To Collect A Particular Piece Of Evidence: Allahabad High Court
Sparsh Upadhyay
3 Sep 2022 10:50 AM GMT
The Allahabad High Court has observed that an accused cannot ask the trial Court for a direction to the prosecuting agency that a shred of particular evidence is collected which may be in his favor.The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh dismissed a petition moved by Former IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur, who had sought the preservation of the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the then Additional...
The Allahabad High Court has observed that an accused cannot ask the trial Court for a direction to the prosecuting agency that a shred of particular evidence is collected which may be in his favor.
The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh dismissed a petition moved by Former IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur, who had sought the preservation of the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the then Additional Chief Secretary Home, DGP, ADG Women's Cell, Police Commissioner Lucknow along with other police officials.
Essentially, Thakur is facing a criminal case [under sections 120B, 167, 195A, 218, 306, 504, 506 IPC] wherein he has been accused of abetting the suicide of a rape victim and her friend . Both of them had set themselves ablaze outside the Supreme Court last year.
The 24-year-old woman, who was allegedly raped by Bahujan Samaj Party MP Atul Rai in 2019, had succumbed to burn injuries on August 24. Her male friend, a 27-year-old Delhi University graduate, had also died during treatment.
Thakur moved to the High Court seeking a direction to the prosecution/state to preserve certain Call Detail Records (C.D.Rs.) of a total of 18 persons claiming that C.D.Rs. of such public officers/officials are relevant for the just decision of the case in which he has been implicated.
It was his specific plea that since he had been exposing the Government and officers in public, therefore, a total of 18 officials including ACS Home and DGP had conspired to falsely implicate him in the case of self-immolation of the rape victim and her friend.
It was further contended by his Counsel, Nutan Thakur that the call details would demonstrate that the instructions were given, and there was a communication between the various police officials as well as Home Secretary, and Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to implicate the petitioner/accused in the suicide case.
Responding to his plea, the Court noted that the Call details only would demonstrate that calls are made by one to another, and the contents of the call cannot be gathered from mere C.D.Rs.
The Court further observed that if two officers/officials have talked or given instructions to each other in respect of any incident that would not amount that the accused was being falsely implicated.
"Be that as it may, since the trial is still pending, every defence, which may be available to the accused, can be taken at an appropriate stage. He cannot ask the trial Court for a direction to the prosecuting agency that a piece of particular evidence is collected which may be in his favor," the Court remarked as it did not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order of the trial court dismissing Thakur's plea.
However, considering the fact that two persons had died by committing suicide in front of Gate No.6 of the Supreme Court, the Court said that it expected that the Trial Court shall expedite the trial and conclude the same. Trial Court should afford a reasonable opportunity for a fair trial to the accused.
Case title - Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5954 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 413
