The High Court allowed criminal petitions challenging the trial court's order permitting the prosecution to admit a pen drive and summon a witness late in the trial. The court set aside the lower court's order on public order and bare possibility grounds.
Criminal Petitions allowed; Trial Court order setting aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.371 & 372 of 2023
COMMON ORDER:
As both the petitions arise out of the same order dated 09.01.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.52 of 2022, both these petitions are being disposed of by this common order.
M. Bhakthavatsalam, Sub-Inspector of Police collected the C.C T.V footage of certain cameras installed in the area of the scene of offence. The said C.C T.V footage is said to have been collected in a Compact Disk as well as a pen drive.
2
and Ors1 . The trial Court took the view that the evidence of the proposed witness is just and necessary for arriving at a proper conclusion in the case and that the evidence that is being adduced to the proposed witness does not in any manner result
1 (2022) 2 ALD 712 (Crl.) SC
3
in a surprise to the accused and that it is only a reinforcement of the existing evidence.
trial Court dated 09.01.2023 have approached this Court.
4
5
collected in a C.D and pen drive, by Sri M. Bhakthavatsalam. The accused, at the time of the marking of the C.D as a material object, had raised a specific objection that, the same cannot be marked, as a copy of the C.D had not been given to the accused earlier. (The trial court has taken a different view on this issue, which would have to be decided in the trial, as the view of this court is only a prima facie view). It does not require to be stated that a copy of the pen drive was never served on the accused as the original itself was never produced.
6
Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Date : 10.02.2023 RJS
7
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.371 & 372 of 2023
Date : 10.02.2023
RJS
8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application to summon an additional witness to admit a pen drive recording at a late stage is maintainable.
Whether the trial court's order allowing the reception of fresh evidence (pen drive) through prosecution witness is sustainable.
Petitioners (Accused Nos. 1 to 11)
State
Justice R. Raghunandan Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
