State Of U.P. vs Samir And 6 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 20026 ALL

Allahabad High Court

State Of U.P. vs Samir And 6 Others on 30 May, 2024

Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma

Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:98769
 
Court No. - 81
 

 
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 114 of 2024
 

 
Appellant :- State of U.P.
 
Respondent :- Samir And 6 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- A. K. Sand
 

 
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
 

This is Government Appeal.

The stamp reporter has reported that the appeal is beyond time by 38 days.

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present Government appeal defective has been filed by the State with prayer to allow the appeal and set aside the order dated 20.12.2023 passed by learned trial court for acquittal of accused respondent.

It is submitted by learned A.G.A. that in this case, there was C.C.T.V. footage which was exhibited before the learned trial court and there was other evidence on record but it was not taken into consideration by the learned trial court while acquitting the accused on the basis of lack of certificate under Section 65-B(4) of Indian Evidence Act. In this way, the order passed by learned trial court cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, request to grant leave for appeal.

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned A.G.A. and perusal of judgment passed by the learned trial court, it appears that on the basis of C.C.T.V. footage accused persons were implicated in the present case and prosecution was based only on this C.C.T.V. footage but in support thereof no certificate under Section 65-B(4) of Indian Evidence Act was produced by the prosecution which was necessary for admissibility of C.C.T.V. footage as held by Division Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anwar PV Vs. P.K. Bashir 2014 (10) SCC 473, C.D., D.V.D. or pen-drive which is adduced as secondary electronic evidence cannot be admissible unless authentic certificate under Section 65-B(4) of Indian Evidence Act is presented. In this way, the order dated 20.12.2023 as passed by the learned trial court while acquitting the accused persons cannot be said to be illegal, inappropriate and against law, therefore, this appeal is not liable to be entertained. As a result, leave to file appeal is hereby rejected.

Accordingly, the present Government appeal defective is rejected.

Order Date :- 30.5.2024

Anurag Singh