The Delhi High Court has allowed former Aam Aadmi Party councillor Tahir Hussain to obtain documents used by Delhi Police in other Delhi riots cases, including forensic data extracted from his mobile phone and verified call-data records. The order overturns a trial court decision that had denied access to the material.
Hussain, who is facing trial in another case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots, had sought the documents for use in those proceedings. According to Jagran’s report, the High Court accepted his petition and directed that the requested material be made available.
The documents sought by Hussain include data extracted by the Forensic Science Laboratory from his mobile phone in a first information report registered at Khajuri Khas police station. The extracted material was stored on a hard disk, and Hussain sought access to it.
He also sought a certified copy of his call-data records from a separate first information report registered at Dayalpur police station. Call-data records can form part of the material examined in criminal proceedings, although the High Court order described in the report concerns access to the records and not any final finding on their evidentiary value.
The case highlights the procedural importance of access to material that investigating agencies have used in connected or separate proceedings. For an accused facing trial, documents from related cases may be sought to examine how evidence was collected, preserved and presented, subject to the court’s directions and applicable legal procedures.
The High Court’s decision does not amount to an acquittal, discharge or finding on the allegations against Hussain. It is an order allowing him to obtain specified documents after the trial court had refused the request. The material will be used by Hussain in the other case in which he is facing trial, according to the report.
The order also places attention on the handling of digital evidence in riot-related prosecutions. Mobile-phone extractions, hard-disk storage and call-data records are all part of an evidence chain that must be identified and produced through formal legal processes. The details reported in this case concern access to those records; the supplied report does not state what the data contains or how it may affect the trial.
Hussain was a councillor of the Aam Aadmi Party before becoming an accused in cases related to the Delhi riots. The riots led to multiple police cases across areas including Khajuri Khas and Dayalpur, and evidence from one investigation can become relevant to proceedings in another when a court permits its use.
The next stage will depend on how the documents are supplied and how they are presented in the trial proceedings. The High Court’s order, as reported, settles the immediate question of access but does not determine the merits of the criminal case or the conclusions that the trial court may ultimately reach.
