Advocate Vivek Nasa

It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme court of India in Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat that, A subsequent complaint under section 420 IPC is admissible & not barred even if prior complaint under section 138 NI Act is pending or appeal thereto in pending adjudication. Supreme Court of India Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat ; Anr on 23 April, 2012 Author: . B Chauhan Bench: B.S. Chauhan, Jagdish Singh Khehar REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 645 of 2012 Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel …Appellant Versus State of Gujarat & Anr. …Respondents J U D G M E N T Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 18.8.2011 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No. 7807 of 2006, by which the High Court has dismissed the application filed by the presen

ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE RELATED TO ELECTRONIC RECORDS UNDER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT AND INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT WRITTEN BY: VIVEK NASA ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE / EVIDENCE RELATED TO ELECTRONIC RECORDS NOT ADMISSIBLE WITHOUT CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 65B(4) OF INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT. ANY AUDIO/VIDEO RECORDING OF ANY CRIMINAL OFFENCE GIVEN TO POLICE ON CD/DVD/PEN DRIVE, NOT ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE PER SE . After implementation of Information Technology Act 2000 (as amended), amendments were made to other statues like Indian Penal code and Indian Evidence Act, to recognize offences/ criminal acts done, using computer systems (including electronic devices). Amendments were also introduced to Indian Evidence Act to recognize evidence collected using computer systems. Section 65A and 65B were added to recognize admissibility of evidence related to electronic records. Section 65A of Indian Evidence Act reads as under: “Section 65A: Special provisions as to evidence relating to el