Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

PW17-EHC Jatinder Kumar deposed that on 07.01.2019, on receipt of information, he alongwith SI Jai Singh and HC Rakesh Kumar reached at the spot. They found a blood-stained dead body lying in kitchen area in basement of the temple. He proved the statement Ex.PD made by Kamal Kumar to SI Jai Singh; the endorsement Ex.PAN made by SI Jai Singh on the said statement and stated that the same was handed over to him by SI Jai Singh for registration of FIR.

PW 18 -ASI Pardeep Kumar also remained associated during the investigation with SI Jai Singh on 09.01.2019, 10.01.2019 and 12.01.2019. He deposed regarding the various proceedings conducted during investigation by Jai Singh and also proved the disclosure statement Ex.PY suffered by the accused on 10.01.2019. He also deposed regarding handing over eight parcels by MHC Narinder Kumar on 05.02.2019 for 15 of 27 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:109431-DB depositing the same at FSL, Madhuban, which he deposited on the same day and handed over receipt to HC Narinder Kumar. He also testified about handing over one sealed parcel containing DVR to him by HC Narinder Kumar on 22.03.2019 and returning of the same by CFSL authorities for want of two hard disc or one TB each; and re-handing of the said sealed DVR alongwith one hard disc to him on 09.4.2019, which was deposited by him with CFSL Chandigarh. He also deposed about depositing of one blank hard disc with CFSL Chandigarh, which was handed over to him by MHC Narinder Kumar on 11.04.2019.

24. Prosecution has also relied upon the CCTV footage retrieved from a DVR found from the spot on 07.01.2019. During the statement of 25 of 27 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:109431-DB PW18 ASI Pardeep Kumar a sealed parcel Ex.PAX sealed with seven seals bearing impression DPG of CFSL Chandigarh alongwith specimen seal letter Ex.PAX/1 was produced. When the said parcel was opened in the Court, it was found to contain a hard disc having data retrieved from DVR Ex.MO/3. The hard disc was played in the Court, which was found to contain many footages of CCTV clippings. In one of the clippings, the accused was found entering the temple premises and in the other clipping, accused was found entering the room in the temple premises alongwith the deceased; yet in an another clipping, accused was found coming outside the room alone and moving hurriedly. The prosecution has tried to connect the accused with the crime on the basis of these clippings. But this CCTV footage and the DVR have not been proved by the prosecution as per law. No witness has been examined to prove as to who had examined the DVR and who retrieved the data to the hard disc from the said DVR and who converted the same in the CDs. Certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act has not been produced. It is not proved that clippings of the CCTV contained in the hard disc were of the relevant time i.e. intervening night of 6/7.01.2019. Date and time of the CCTV footage is not proved, thus, on the sole basis of these clippings, accused cannot be connected with the crime in question.