SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
Chattrapal Singh Lodha – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.(Oral)

CRL.REV.P. 732/2017 & Crl.M.A.16099/2017 (stay)

1. Status report is filed. Same is taken on record.

2. Petitioners impugn order on charge dated 10.08.2017, whereby, charges have been framed against the petitioners under Section 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120B Indian Penal Code.

3. The only challenge raised by learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners are liable to be discharged as the audio-video CDs relied upon by the prosecution, being copies of the electronic evidence, were not admissible in evidence without a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act and thus the Trial Court erred in relying upon them even for the purposes of framing of charges. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Anwar P.V. vs. P.K. Bashir & Ors., (2014) 10 SCC 473.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the requirement of a certificate under Section 65B would arise only if secondary evidence is sought to be produced and further that it is only at the stage of trial that the court is called upon to consider as to whether the requirements of Sec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top