Back
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Kasturi Suryanarayana @ Suri @ Mukku Suri – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.Raghunandan Rao, J. - As both the petitions arise out of the same order dated 09.01.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.52 of 2022, both these petitions are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Heard Sri Ravi Teja Padiri, learned counsel for the petitioners in Crl.P.No.371 of 2023 and Sri Shaik Mohd.Ismail learned counsel for the petitioners in Crl.M.P.No.372 of 2023 and the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.371 of 2023 are accused Nos.1 to 6 and the petitioners in Crl.P.No.372 of 2023 are accused Nos.7 to 11 in S.C.No.309 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Rajampet for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 449, 351 and 302 r/w 149 of I.P.C.
4. In the course of investigation, one Sri M. Bhakthavatsalam, Sub-Inspector of Police collected the C.C T.V footage of certain cameras installed in the area of the scene of offence. The said C.C T.V footage is said to have been collected in a Compact Disk as well as a pen drive.
5. The Compact Disk was filed along with the charge sheet after the completion of investigation. However, the pen drive was not filed. Sri M. Bhakthavatsalam, S.I of Police was also not listed as a witness in the charge
The prosecution cannot file an application to admit a pen drive and summon a witness to testify about the pen drive after the completion of the investigation and after the accused has revealed his/he....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a Certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for the admissibility of electronic evidence, and the court'....
The certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act must accompany the electronic record when it is produced in evidence, and the prosecution is obligated to supply all documents upon which relian....
The court clarifies that electronic evidence can be admitted during trial, emphasizing the necessity for ensuring genuineness without assuming it requires reverting to an investigative process.
The accused has a right to access digital evidence for a fair trial, and denial of such access is unjustifiable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
