Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Karnataka High Court has declined to consider a plea by Mohammed Shiyab, the main accused in the murder case of BJP Yuva Morcha member Praveen Nettaru, for furnishing the call detail and records between the officers of National Investigative Agency (NIA) and the advocate of the central probe agency.

A division bench of Justices Sreenivas Harish Kumar and G Basavaraja, however, allowed his plea for accessing CCTV footage at the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) Madiwala and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) office, if available.

In a writ petition, Shiyab claimed that the investigation was not fair and that innocent persons were implicated in the case. He contended that when the other accused Mohammed Jabir (accused number 18) was in police custody, NIA had applied to the special court for recording his confession statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

When produced before the special court on February 7, 2023, from judicial custody, Jabir had complained about ill-treatment by the NIA officers on November 6, 2022, and from November 7, 2022, to November 14, 2022, compelling him to state in the way they wanted.

The petitioner claimed Jabir had also complained that the NIA officials themselves arranged an advocate for him. 

He submitted that the special court had refused his request for securing the CCTV footage by an order dated March 13, 2023. 

The NIA, on its part, opposed the plea, contending that telephonic conversation between the officers cannot be ordered to be produced as they may contain of official communications in respect of which confidentiality and secrecy has to be maintained. 

The conversation between the advocate and the client is a privileged communication which cannot be disclosed according to Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, it said.

The NIA also submitted that even if there are recordings in the CCTV, the storage capacity of the CCTV is for a limited time and by the time the application under Section 91 of CrPC, was filed, the footages were not available and for this reason no direction can be given for production of footages. 

Concurring with the view of the special court, the bench said, “The call detail is certainly hit by Sections 124 and 126 of the Indian Evidence Act. They cannot be produced. The telephonic conversations, between the NIA officers, may contain official communications about which secrecy and confidentiality have to be maintained and therefore, this request is rightly rejected by the trial court we also cannot consider the said request.”

The bench, however, directed the central project coordinator of the high court and his technical team to visit the FSL office, where Jabir was interrogated, and the NIA office to inspect the CCTV footage and their storage capacities. 

"If the footages are available, it should be retrieved, copied and submitted to the special court in a pen drive for making use of the same during the trial," the HC said.

“If the footages of the above period are unavailable, a report to that effect shall be given to this court. The central project coordinator and his technical team shall submit a report on or before July 27, 2023,” the bench said. 

Case Title: Md. Shiyab Vs NIA