VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

N.Mahendra Babu v. The Commissioner of Police

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
14 July 2026
Bench
G.K. Ilanthiraiyanauthor
Case no.
WP Crl. 1397/2025

Judgment

ORDER The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, praying to direct the 1st and 2nd Respondents to consider the Petitioner's Representation dated

01.11.2025, seeking to secure and save the mobile data of Mobile No.8124427960 and intimate the same to the Petitioner.

¶2It is seen that the Petitioner is an Advocate. His stepmother and stepsister have filed a suit for partition in O.S.No.9717 of 2021 and it is pending on the file of the learned XVI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, claiming 1/4th share in the suit property.

¶3While the suit was pending, the Petitioner had filed a Civil Miscellaneous Petition in C.M.P.No.12115 of 2023 in C.R.P.No.935 of 2023, to take cognizance of the alleged perjury under Section 340 of the Code or Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 read with Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

¶4It is in this background, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the 2nd Respondent to secure and save the mobile data of the Petitioner's stepmother. However, the 2nd Respondent is not an Authority to secure and save the mobile data, and to provide the details sought for by the Petitioner.

¶5It is seen that the 2nd Respondent does not maintain or have such information as requested by the Petitioner through his Representation

01.11.2025, which does not fall within the domain of purview of the 2nd Respondent herein, and they are maintained only by the concerned service providers.

¶6Hence, the 2nd Respondent has no role in securing the mobile data and the details of call logs which are only maintained by the concerned service providers.

¶7Therefore, the prayer sought for by the Petitioner cannot be countenanced. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

14.07.2026 arb To:

1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Veppery, Chennai – 600 007.

2.The Authorization Officer, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), 4th to 7th Floor, Tower-F, World Trade Centre, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi – 110 029.

3.The Inspector of Police, Chennai City Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai – 600 104.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. arb

14.07.2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 14.07.2026 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN N.Mahendra Babu, S/o. Late K.Narayanan … Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Veppery, Chennai – 600 007. 2.The Authorization Officer, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), 4th to 7th Floor, Tower-F, World Trade Centre, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi – 110 029. 3.The Inspector of Police, Chennai City Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. … Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st and 2nd Respondents to consider the Petitioner's Representation dated 01.11.2025 to secure and save the 8124427960 mobile data and intimate the Petitioner within a time frame. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Nagarjuna For Respondents : For R1 and R3 : Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) For R2 : Mr.K.Srinivasamurthy Senior Panel Counsel

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.