-
by sayum
14 March 2026 1:58 PM
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that a trial court cannot restrict an accused person to proving data only by leading evidence in their defence. The decision was made by Justice Amarjot Bhatti in response to a revision challenging an order passed by an Additional Sessions Judge, in which an application filed by the petitioner for copies of WhatsApp chat, other network data, and call details of cell phone had been dismissed.
The case involves an FIR under Sections 304-B and 120-B of the IPC, registered on the statement of complainant Vipan Kumar Dhir, father of the deceased victim. The complainant's daughter was married to Gaurav Aadia, who spent Rs. 35-40 lakh on the marriage. She was ill-treated in the matrimonial home for not giving a car in the marriage, and her husband and in-laws were unhappy with the dowry articles. As a result, the daughter was ill-treated, and she used to complain about the conduct of her husband and in-laws. According to the complainant, his daughter was made to consume some poisonous substance by her in-laws and died during treatment.
The issue before the bench was whether the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge needed interference. The High Court noted that the order allowed an application filed by the accused, and the data of the mobile phone, including WhatsApp and Facebook chat, and messages, was retrieved and sent to the CFSL department. The CFSL report was already supplied to the accused, enabling them to prepare their defence in a proper manner.
The bench observed that the trial court could decide the case in a fair manner by considering all the facts and circumstances of the case. The accused has the right to cross-examine the relevant witnesses by confronting them with the said data; otherwise, they would be deprived of their valuable right to cross-examine witnesses in an effective manner.
The High Court stated that it was the duty of the court to give a fair opportunity to the prosecution as well as the accused to lead their respective evidence properly so that the court could reach the right conclusion. The bench ruled that the restriction imposed by the trial court on the accused to prove the data only by leading evidence in their defence was not justified. The second application filed by the accused to supply the data to confront the relevant witnesses did not amount to a review of the previous order. The condition imposed on the accused that they could use the data in defence only was without justification. Therefore,
The bench set aside the impugned order.
Daksh Aadia v. State of Punjab
Case No.: CRR-53-2020 (O&M)
