No.8290267929 was being used by Pukhraj, though the SIM was issued in the name of his son Rajendra. It is to be noted that neither the phone in question (which carried said SIM) has been recovered from the Pukhraj nor the Investigating Officer has carried out any inquiry/investigation or brought on record any evidence to show that such number was being used by Pukhraj. 17. True it is that when call details of the above referred phone no.(8290267929) is examined, a series of calls between such number and the number of other co-accused persons can be found, but simply because of this fact, it cannot be said that the applicant was involved in hatching the conspiracy of murdering the deceased, unless there is other incriminating evidence. 18. Concededly, the cell phone, call details whereof has been attributed to the applicant has not been recovered from him. It is surprising that the phone which was issued in the name of applicant (Pukhraj) and was allegedly used by his son (Rajendra) bearing No.6376724285 is shown to have been (as per the allegation of Investigating Officer) recovered from Rajendra, but its call details have not been placed on record. Such lapse/omission or may be concerted attempt cannot be taken lightly. Learned Public Prosecutor could not satisfy the Court that why call details including location of the phone number which was purportedly being used by Rajendara @ Raju (though issued in the name of applicant) was not obtained and if obtained, why the same has not been made part of the charge-sheet.
