View source for Evidence in Indian law/ Indian Evidence Act

=== Memory cards, pen drives are documents: SC===
[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2019%2F11%2F30&entity=Ar01806&sk=19C2F56F&mode=text  Dhananjay Mahapatra, Nov 30, 2019: ''The Times of India'']

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court said electronic evidence in a criminal case should be classified as ‘document’ and the accused would be entitled to a copy of the same to prepare the defence.

“We hold that the contents of the memory card/ pen drive being electronic record must be regarded as a document. If the prosecution is relying on the same, ordinarily, the accused must be given a cloned copy thereof to enable him/her to present an effective defence during the trial,” a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari said.

However, if the electronic evidence pertained to a rape case, then the trial court, keeping in mind the sensitivity of the contents, could deny the accused a copy so as to prevent violation of right to privacy and dignity of the woman, said Justice Khanwilkar, who wrote the judgment.

“In cases involving issues such as privacy of the complainant/witness or his/her identity, the court may be justified in providing only inspection thereof to the accused and his/her lawyer or expert for presenting effective defence during the trial. The court may issue suitable directions to balance the interests of both sides,” the bench said.

In the case at hand, the judicial first class magistrate in Angamaly (Kerala), and then the Kerala HC had rejected an accused’s plea for a copy of the pen drive containing a video recording of an alleged sexual assault that was annexed to the chargesheet as evidence. The prosecution case was based on forensic report which suggested that eight video recordings were retrieved from the memory card of the accused’s phone and that the video files were found to be recorded on February 17, 2017, between 10:30pm and 10:48pm.

To accord the accused a fair trial without violating the right to privacy and dignity of the woman, the SC said, “If the accused or his lawyer himself, additionally, intends to inspect the contents of the memory card/pen drive in question, he can request the magistrate to provide him inspection in court, if necessary, even for more than once along with his lawyer and IT expert to enable him to effectively defend himself during the trial.

“If such an application is filed, the magistrate must consider the same appropriately and exercise judicious discretion with objectivity while ensuring that it is not an attempt by the accused to protract the trial. While allowing the accused and his lawyer or authorised IT expert, all care must be taken that they do not carry any devices, much less electronic devices, including mobile phone which may have the capability of copying or transferring the electronic record thereof or mutating the contents of the memory card/pen drive in any manner. Such multi-pronged approach may subserve the ends of justice and also effectuate the right of accused to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.”

[[Category:India|EEVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACTEVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACTEVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
EVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT]]
[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|EEVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACTEVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACTEVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
EVIDENCE IN INDIAN LAW/ INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT]]