Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Binod Singh @ Binod Kumar Singh @ Binod @ Vinod Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to quash the order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad in connection with Sessions Trial No.276 of 2017 whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. for marking the document exhibit after playing the pen drive contained video footage in the Court, has been disposed of by the court concerned.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner, who is an accused person of the said Sessions Trial No.276 of 2017, filed a petition under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. with a prayer that the pen drive containing the video footage of the statement of the witness – Amar Singh be firstly permitted to be played in the court to enable the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to admit or deny the same and further to mark the Pen Drive without formal proof of the same and also a prayer was made that the voice of Amar Singh may be ordered to be taken by the experts of the State Forensi
The court emphasized the right to present electronic evidence under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C., highlighting the necessity of compliance with the Evidence Act when genuineness is disputed.
For electronic records to be admissible as evidence, compliance with S.65B of the Evidence Act is mandatory.
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 absence of a Section 65-B certificate for electronic evidence is a curable defect and does not invalidate trial proceedings.
Point of Law : Remedy under Article 226 is discretionary remedy for doing complete justice and correcting injustice. So far Section 482 of the Code is concerned, if the high court finds necessary for....
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
