Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Sharadendu Tiwari vs Ajay Arjun Singh on 24 April, 2017
Bench: J. Chelameswar, S. Abdul Nazeer
1
ITEM NO.55 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 5123/2017
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17/01/2017
in EP No. 01/2014 17/01/2017 in IA No. 15554/2016 passed by the
High Court Of M.P. . At Jabalpur)
SHARADENDU TIWARI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
AJAY ARJUN SINGH AND ORS Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and seeking
permission to submit cds and certificate and permission to file
additional documents and interim relief and office report)
Date : 24/04/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Naman Nagrath, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Prakash Upadhyay, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Upadhyay,Adv.
Mr. Nitin Gaur, Adv.
Mr. Vidit Monga, Adv.
Mr. Kaustabh Hansraj, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ravindra Shrivastava, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Navin Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Sahay, Adv.
Mr. Vikram Aditya Singh, Adv.
Ms. Akanksha Sisodia, Adv.
Mr. Anantha Narayana M.g.,Adv.
Ms. Mitu Singh, Adv.
Mr. Tanvir Khan, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Digitally signed by DEEPAK MANSUKHANI Date: 2017.04.26 14:49:46 IST Reason: We have heard the matter in some detail.
2There are certain intricate questions regarding the interpretation of the Evidence Act pertaining to the admissibility of computer generated information in evidence. The petitioner seeks to produce certain data contained on CDs which are supplied to him by the Election Commission of India, allegedly containing the pictorial and voice data of speeches made by the returned candidate and a 'star campaigner' on behalf of the returned candidate and also other information relating to trial of the Election Petition.
Whether the material produced by the petitioner is an admissible piece of evidence or not is a matter which requires further scrutiny.
Having regard to the fact that the Election Petition is filed challenging the election of the first respondent to the legislative assembly of Madhya Pradesh which stipulates in the year 2014, we deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to tender the above-mentioned material in evidence at the time of the trial of the Election Petition and the High Court will receive the same. However, the admissibility of such material shall be subject to the outcome of the instant petition. The trial of the Election Petition, need not await the hearing of the instant petition. It can otherwise proceed in accordance with the schedule fixed by the High Court except that the 3 final judgment shall not be pronounced in the Election Petition until the instant petition is decided.
List the matter on 8th August, 2017.
(DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR-cum-PS Court Master