In a pivotal decision, the Supreme Court has granted the Karnataka government’s request to recall a witness for the authentication of electronic evidence in the 2008 Bengaluru serial blasts case. This ruling underscores the principle that a fair trial must ensure that the guilty are convicted and the innocent are not wrongfully punished.
The bench, led by Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, overturned the decisions of the Karnataka High Court and the trial court, which had previously rejected the plea to recall the witness, M Krishna from the Computer Forensic Division, CFSL, to produce a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.
Justice Bindal, authoring the judgment, stated,
“A certificate under Section 65-B of the Act, sought to be produced is not an evidence which has been created now. It is meeting the requirement of law to prove a report on record. By permitting the prosecution to produce the certificate under Section 65B of the Act at this stage will not result in any irreversible prejudice to the accused. The accused will have full opportunity to rebut the evidence led by the prosecution.”
The bench highlighted the use of Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, emphasizing its role in revealing the truth and serving justice and public interest.
“In the case at hand, this exercise of power is required to uphold the truth, as no prejudice as such is going to be caused to the accused,”
the bench added.
The court agreed with Aman Panwar, Additional Advocate General of Karnataka, that the primary electronic evidence and the CFSL report were already on record. The prosecution sought to recall the witness and produce the Section 65-B certificate only after the defense objected to the CFSL report.
Also read- Former Supreme Court Justice Lokur Critiques Current Bail Practices In Indian Courts (lawchakra.in)
Balaji Srinivasan, representing the accused, argued that the prosecution’s attempt to introduce the certificate after a six-year delay was an effort to fill gaps in their evidence and would prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial. However, the Supreme Court’s decision to allow the certificate’s production at any stage of the trial, as long as it is not concluded, reflects a commitment to ensuring that justice is served through the proper authentication of electronic evidence.
The case, titled “State of Karnataka v. T.Naseer @ Thadiantavida Naseer,” marks a significant moment in the Indian judiciary’s handling of electronic evidence and fair trial principles.
Also read- Kerala Government Appeals To Supreme Court Over Governor’s Bill Assent Delay (lawchakra.in)
