Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Nanki Bai Sen, W/o. Shri Sanat Sen – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Station House Officer Police Station, Bemetara – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.
1. Since both the Acquittal Appeal filed on behalf of the complainant and the Criminal Appeal preferred by the accused/appellant arise out of the same judgment passed by the learned trial Court, and as the issues involved in both the appeals are interconnected and based on the same set of facts and evidence, it was considered appropriate and in the interest of justice to hear them together. Accordingly, both the appeals have been clubbed, heard analogously, and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Acquittal Appeal No. 65/2013 has been preferred on behalf of the complainant assailing the legality, validity, and propriety of the judgment dated 07.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bemetara, Civil District Durg, Revenue District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 36/2012. By the said judgment, the learned Trial Court has acquitted respondent No. 2, namely Ramesh Kumar, of the charges punishable under Sections 342, 506-B, and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and has convicted him only for the offence punishable under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, ‘IT
The requirement of producing a valid certificate for the admissibility of secondary electronic evidence is mandatory, and failure renders the evidence inadmissible, affecting the validity of convicti....
Point of Law – POCSO – Sentence - certificate under S. 65B(4) is unnecessary if the “original document” itself is produced, since it is being used as primary evidence of the information contained in ....
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 ruled that electronic evidence must comply with Section 65B of the Evidence Act for admissibility; failure to do so resulted in the prosecution's case being deemed insufficient.
Suspicion, however, strong cannot take place of proof – Large distance between “may be true” and “must be true”, must be covered by way of clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence.
Appeal against acquittal – A redundant criminal prosecution should not be protracted.
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, demonstrating the high burden of proof required in rape cases.
The absence of a Section 65-B certificate for electronic evidence is a curable defect and does not invalidate trial proceedings.
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
