Grave suspicion and Section 65B compliance barred reliance on CCTV footage, sustaining discharge of accused officers.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....At the stage of charge, the test is grave suspicion, not proof of conviction; applying that standard, the court found belated embellishments, material improvements, and weak medical corroboration insufficient to sustain prosecution against the officers, so discharge was upheld. It also held that CCTV footage was inadmissible without a Section 65B certificate, and the copied recording could not be relied on because its integrity was not properly proved. Once excluded, the electronic material did not support the allegation of illegal apprehension, and the limited scope of revision justified no interference with the Sessions Court's order.....