Fair trial over privacy: Rajasthan High Court allows NDPS accused's plea for CDR, tower location of police officer

In a ruling aimed at ensuring a fair trial, the Rajasthan High Court ordered that the location of a police officer's mobile tower be recorded and produced. [Avinash Sharma v. State Of Rajasthan and Rajesh Kumar Sharma]

This was in response to the accused's claim that the officer was on the scene considerably earlier than the police had claimed.

"As principles of natural justice are integral part of fair trial, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, any denial of the best available evidence or effective and substantial hearing to the accused, in proving his defence, would amount to denial of free and fair trial," said the Court.

The order was passed by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand on November 6 while hearing a petition filed by Dr. Avinash Sharma, currently lodged in Kotputli-Behror District Jail in connection with a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act).

Following the trial court's denial of his request under Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the petitioner filed a motion before the High Court.

In order to demonstrate what actually transpired on September 8, 2025, he sought call data records and mobile tower location of Station House Officer (SHO) Rajesh Kumar Sharma during the hours before and after the alleged recovery of contraband medicines.

The petitioner maintained that the police account of the recovery was fabricated.

He alleged that officers were at his clinic much earlier than the time mentioned in official records.

He argued that his claim would be supported by the investigating officer's mobile location data, which would also be a crucial component of his defence.

The High Court agreed with the petitioner and opined that the plea could not be turned down.

It said that electronic evidence, such as the location of the tower, becomes a crucial component of assessing the prosecution's case when an accused person contests the existence of police officers at the recovery site.

"No doubt, while passing the appropriate direction for preserving and production of Call Data Record/tower location details under Section 94 of the BNSS would violate the right to privacy of the police officials but the right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India to ensure a free and fair investigation/trial would prevail over the right to privacy of the police officials," said the Court.

It acknowledged that obtaining a police officer's call logs raises privacy concerns, but stated that these issues cannot prevail over the accused's right to a fair trial.

It cited past Supreme Court decisions that acknowledged an accused person's right to request digital evidence that might support their defence and permit the use of electronic records in criminal proceedings.

Withholding this evidence could compromise the trial's fairness, particularly in NDPS cases where procedure is crucial, the Court held.

Thus, it requested that the trial court to enquire about the tower location of SHO Rajesh Kumar Sharma's mobile number for the period of the incident, in order to address the worries of both parties.

The mobile company was instructed to remove all incoming and outgoing numbers while revealing the relevant call data records.

This approach would allow the defence to obtain the location data it requires while protecting unrelated communication details, the Court said.

[Read Judgment]