Back
JAY SENGUPTA
Amanatus Siddika – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Jay Sengupta, J. - This is a revisional application challenging an order dated 08.10.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kandi, Murshidabad in Criminal Revision No. 17 of 2021, thereby affirming an order passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting an application of an accused under Section 91 of the Code praying for preservation of CCTV footages and phone call records.
2. The petitioner is an accused in GR Case No. 898 of 2021 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kandi, Murshidabad corresponding to Salar Police Station Case No. 104 dated 13.06.2021 under Section 498A of the Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She filed an application dated 24.08.2021 under Section 91 of the Code praying for preservation of CCTV footages and phone call records. It is the petitioner's claim that on a particular date of occurrence, neither the informant nor the petitioner or her sister was present at the place of occurrence. The petitioner prayed that the CCTV footages dated 12.06.2021 from the cameras installed at Hattala, Masundi and Binodia bus-stand and the phone call records between the concerned parties would bear out the
The power under Section 91 of the Code can be exercised before the delivery of judgment, but the Court may assess the relevance of the requested documents and materials during trial.
Section 91 Cr.P.C. empowers Court to ensure production of any document or other thing “necessary or desirable” for purpose of any investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceedings under Code by issu....
The accused's right to summon relevant evidence for their defense, including electronic records, is recognized, and the legislative intent behind Section 91 Cr.P.C. is to ensure discovery of crucial ....
The preservation of exculpatory evidence is crucial for a fair trial in criminal proceedings.
The order passed on application filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. was interlocutory in nature. The accused persons had not been summoned to appear before the Court concerned. The investigation in the....
The court emphasized the fundamental right to defend oneself and the necessity of preserving evidence for a fair trial, allowing the summoning of call data records and related documents.
The necessity to preserve electronic evidence for establishing innocence can outweigh privacy concerns of investigative officials.
The accused has the right to obtain and use call details for his defense and to confront the prosecution's witnesses with relevant questions.
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
