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

2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 9828

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
3330 - TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
M.ASHOK KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
V.D NAIDU – Respondent


ORDER:

Assailing the order dated 10.12.2018 in Crl.M.P.No.2436 of

2018 in STC.No.35 of 2016, the present Criminal Petition is filed. Whereas, the petitioner/accused has filed an application under Section 45C of Evidence Act, the said application was dismissed by the learned V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati for not producing 65B certificate and rejected the application filed by the petitioner/accused relying on the judgment of Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K.Basheer1, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that secondary evidence of electronic record sought to be given cannot be admitted in the absence of certificate as specified in

65-B(4) of Evidence Act.

Proof of electronic record is a special provisions introduced by the Information Technology Act, amending various provisions under the Evidence Act. Section 65 read with Section 59 and 65A as special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record, shall be governed by the procedure prescribed under Section 65B of the Evidence Act to prove the contents of

1 2014(10) SCC 473

electronic records. Section 59 is regarding proof of facts by oral evidence, which read as under:

"59. Proof of facts by oral evidence.-- All facts, except the [con

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