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 Section 65B of