Special court says CBI probe complete, custodial custody unnecessary
A special CBI court in Chandigarh on Wednesday granted anticipatory bail to two police personnel who were accused of tampering with evidence in a 2022 sexual harassment case, the court record shows. The order was passed by Special Judge Bhawna Jain, who noted that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had completed its probe and filed a charge-sheet, and that custodial interrogation of the two accused officers was not required.
- Accused: Then Industrial Area SHO Inspector Ram Rattan; Sub‑Inspector Satyawan.
- Allegation: Tampering with seizure of an iPhone 12 and substitution with an iPhone 7, and destruction and re‑drafting of seizure documentation.
- Case origin: Preliminary inquiry after a December 19, 2022 communication from the Chandigarh DGP’s office about alleged misconduct in registration and investigation of certain criminal cases.
Details of alleged tampering as recorded by the CBI
The CBI began its inquiry following information received from the Chandigarh director general of police (DGP) about possible irregularities in the registration and investigation of criminal cases by the Union Territory police. The federal agency examined the probe of a sexual harassment complaint against a former director of a prominent company that was registered in April 2022.
According to the CBI case file cited in court, the accused in that original matter had been arrested under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 354, 354‑D, 294, 506, 509 and 384. During a personal search at the time of arrest, police recorded seizure of an iPhone 12 and its SIM card in the case diary.
The CBI alleges that the iPhone 12 and its SIM were later returned to the accused and another handset — an iPhone 7 without a SIM card — was taken into possession instead. To conceal this substitution, the original seizure memo dated April 4 was reportedly destroyed and a fresh seizure memo dated April 9 was prepared to show that the iPhone 7 had been seized, the agency told the court.
"The CBI had already completed its investigation and filed a chargesheet, and the two accused were not required for custodial interrogation," the special judge observed in the order.
The tampering allegation emerged during forensic and electronic examination by the CBI. The agency said the IMEI number of the handset sent to the forensics laboratory did not match that of the iPhone 12 originally recorded as seized. The probe also examined SIM‑history and location data, which the CBI cited to show that the SIM originally inserted in the iPhone 12 was later used in the iPhone 7. Additional reliance was placed on call‑detail records and other electronic data, the order records.
Procedural background and next steps
The matter reached the CBI after the Chandigarh DGP’s office on December 19, 2022 initiated a communication raising concerns about alleged corrupt practices in how certain cases were registered and investigated by UT police units. The CBI converted that preliminary information into a formal inquiry and subsequently lodged a case that led to the present charge-sheet and proceedings in the special court.
With anticipatory bail now granted to Inspector Ram Rattan and SI Satyawan, the court has signalled that custodial interrogation is not necessary at this stage because the central agency has completed its fact‑finding and moved to the chargesheet stage. The order does not dispose of the underlying accusations; it protects the two accused from immediate arrest while the trial process advances according to law.
| Key dates | Event |
|---|---|
| April 2022 | Sexual harassment case registered; accused arrested; iPhone 12 allegedly seized |
| 4 April 2022 | Date on original seizure memo (allegedly later destroyed) |
| 9 April 2022 | Date on allegedly doctored seizure memo showing iPhone 7 |
| 19 December 2022 | Chandigarh DGP’s office communicated concerns to the CBI |
| CBI probe period | Inquiry, forensic examination and filing of chargesheet (completed as per court) |
The court order makes clear that the legal process will continue; the chargesheet filed by the CBI remains part of the record and will guide subsequent trial proceedings. The anticipatory bail does not adjudicate guilt or innocence and the allegations against the two police personnel will be examined in the judicial process as evidence is led and tested.
