last digit may be different
THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SUNDAR @ SUNDARRAJAN — Appellant VS STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent
( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., Hima Kohli and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. )
Review Petition (Crl.) Nos. 159-160 of 2013 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 300-301 of 2011
DATE OF DECISION 21-03-2023
23. Similarly, the contention based on the difference in the IMEI number recorded in the seizure memo and the call detail records does not affect the prosecutions case for the following reason. The difference in the IMEI number recorded in the seizure memo and the call detail record pertains to the last digit of the 15-digit IMEI number. Every device has a unique IMEI number identifying the brand owner in the model. The first 8 digits are the Type Allocation Code (TAC) digits of which the initial 2 digits identify the reporting body and the next 6 identify the brand owner and device model allocated by the reporting body. The next 6 digits are the unique serial number assigned to individual devices by the manufacturer.[5]
[5] GSMA TAC Allocation and IMEI Programming Rules for Device Brand Owners and Manufacturers, Training Guide (February 2018 v1.0).
24. These 14 digits in the petitioners case match in both the seizure memo and the call detail record. The last digit in the IMEI number is the Luhn check digit based on a function of the other digits using an algorithm. Technically, the last digit, which is the only digit that is different in the seizure memo and the call detail record, can be calculated through the algorithm on the basis of the first 14 digits which are the same in both the documents. As the last digit of an IMEI number is a function of the first 14 digits, as long as the first 14 digits are a match, it can only lead to one unique device. Accordingly, it can be conclusively said that a difference in only the last digit of the IMEI number cannot imply that it represents the IMEI number of a separate device. Therefore, the difference in the last digit of the IMEI number can reasonably be assumed to be a typographical error and does not raise a doubt in the prosecutions case.