Unsealed DVRs, Defective 65B Certificates: Rajasthan High Court Acquits 11 in Sikar Double Murder, Sets Aside Death Sentence

Samples must reach the FSL promptly, and every person handling an item must be documented so that its integrity is uncompromised; relied on in holding the CCTV footage's chain of custody broken (pp. 28-29).

Paras 13-14 quoted on Sections 65A and 65B and the conditions for a Section 65B(4) certificate. The Court noted that it is not good law to the extent it required the certificate to accompany the secondary evidence, but held the para 14 conditions binding and found the letter Ex.P98 did not meet them (pp. 29-32).

Relied on by the State (pp. 18-19). It held that a certificate not in the prescribed format is not per se invalid where authenticity is undisputed, in a case of call records certified by service-provider officials; the Court found the facts entirely different (pp. 31-32).

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of an accused facing the death penalty owing, among other things, to infirmities in the CCTV footage and the want of a valid Section 65B certificate; para 41 quoted (pp. 42-43).

Without blood grouping, the mere presence of human blood on a sample does not help the prosecution; applied to the blood from the scene of crime (p. 48), the Court making the same point on the soil and the car seat cover (pp. 53, 54-55). Also quoted within the Sanjay Kujur passage (pp. 64-65).

Cited for the appellants (p. 14). Paras 59 and 73 quoted: the investigating officer must depose to the exact words of the accused's statement and prove the panchnama, or the discovery cannot be relied on (pp. 50-52). Applied to the disclosures of Ramgopal, Nandlal and Madanlal (pp. 52, 59-60, 63).

Cited for the appellants (p. 14). Relied on for the rule that witnesses must depose to the accused's exact statement leading to a discovery (p. 52); also noted, as applied in Allarakha Habib Memon, for doubt on an FIR where the police station's daily diary entry of the relatives' earlier visit is not produced (p. 69).

Cited for the appellants (p. 14). Where the actual complaint to the police appears withheld, the FIR may be treated as a post-investigation document; applied in holding the FIR hit by Section 162 CrPC because the earlier report and inquiry at Police Station Khatushyamji were kept off the record (pp. 68-70).

Noted as relied on in Allarakha Habib Memon: an FIR prepared after deliberation at the spot, instead of on receipt of the information, taints the investigation (p. 68).

Paras 21-22 quoted: a conviction cannot rest solely on the recovery of a weapon on a confessional statement without other corroborative evidence (pp. 64-65).

Paras 18 and 20 quoted: a Section 27 recovery, even with human blood on the weapon, cannot by itself lead to a finding of guilt without a complete chain of circumstances (pp. 65-66).

Paras 25 and 32 quoted: a false explanation or non-explanation under Section 313 CrPC is only an additional circumstance where the chain is otherwise proved and cannot be used as a link to complete it (p. 71).

The accused's silence or failure to explain can act only as an additional link, does not shift the burden of proof, and a Section 313 statement is not substantive evidence; relied on in rejecting the State's Section 313 argument (pp. 71-73).

Noted as relied on in Santosh Gurung: an answer under Section 313 CrPC cannot fill gaps left by the prosecution witnesses (p. 72).

The Rajasthan State Legal Services Committee appointed a legal team for the appellant facing the death penalty under the directions in this case (p. 7).

Cited for the appellants (case name printed 'State of Rajashan'); not discussed by the Court (p. 14).

Cited by the Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant; not discussed by the Court (p. 18).

Cited by the Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant; not discussed by the Court (p. 18).