Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

ix. Please provide information that whether report regarding 20 voice clips which are reportedly unedited, untempered but not reported authentic as per report under CFSL Chandigarh letter F. No. CFSL(C)/900/17/PYY/319/17/960 dated 29.05.2017 can be used by DRI, Kolkata Authorities for quoting that the DVD was proved authentic by CFSL Chandigarh vide its report under F. No. CFSL(C)/900/17/PYY/319/17/960 dated 29.05.2017. If the answer is affirmative, please provide clarifications that how the report regarding unediting, untempering of only 20 voice clips contained in sub-folders can be generalised to entire DVD for reporting it as authentic without testing the creation aspects of the seized DVD, matching their hash value and establishing the chain of its custody backed with forensic examination of relevant computer hardware(s) used for transfer of data from one device to another and lastly to the said DVD.

xi. Please provide clarification whether the Hash Value of a DVD having 45 files/folders in master folder "DOC" and that having 44 files / folder in master folder "DOC" can be same and identical in any condition. xii. Please also provide clarification that in any conditions, whether such two DVDs i.e. one having 45 files folders in a master folder and another having 44 files folders in a master folder can be forensically called as same and identical. xiii. Please provide information about the Hash Value of the DVD supplied for forensic examination to CFSL Chandigarh vide DRI F. No. DRI/KZU/CF/ENQ- 58(INT45)/2016/549 dated 03.05.2017.