TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the prosecution could be permitted to recall a witness under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and produce a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 at a later stage before the trial was over, where the electronic devices were already on record as primary evidence.
Analysis: The electronic devices seized in the case were already produced before the Trial Court and were treated as primary evidence. The certificate under Section 65B was sought only to satisfy the legal requirement for proving the CFSL report prepared from those devices. The Court applied the principle that a certificate is unnecessary when the original electronic record itself is produced, and relied on the settled position that non-production of the certificate is a curable defect. It further held that, so long as the trial is not over, the certificate may be produced at any stage if the court finds that no irreversible prejudice will be caused to the accused and the exercise serves the cause of justice.
Conclusion: The prosecution was entitled to recall the witness and produce the Section 65B certificate, and the refusal by the courts below was set aside in favour of the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: A certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 may be permitted to be produced at any stage before the conclusion of trial, and a court may allow recall of a witness under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 where doing so causes no irreversible prejudice and advances the search for truth.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
