Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

A bare perusal of the report Ex. PW-21/A shows that there is no reasoning given in the report as to how he arrived at a conclusion that there was no tampering with the memory cards. Further, PW21 has mentioned the hash value of hard disks sent to him in his report Ex.PW-21/A but he has not mentioned the hash value of any of the file of the memory cards examined by him. He has also not given any reason for not mentioning the hash value of the digital files contained in the memory cards Ex. 6/1 to Ex. 6/5 examined by him. PW21 has not even mentioned the date and time of creation and modification of the files in his report. The report is absolutely bereft of any reasons. Even though PW19 Dr. Subrat Kumar Chaudhary has placed on record the properties of Ex. 6/1 during his cross examination which was exhibited as Ex.PW-19/DA but the date of creation of the folder "My Record" and "Video File V0109001.AVI are different and PW19 could not give any satisfactory explanation in this regard. In the absence of original recording device, PW19 was also unable to say from which device video recording was made in the Micro SD Card Ex.6/1. He further deposed that he cannot say if the original device was compatible to make the video recording in Micro SD Card Ex.6/1 as it was not sent for examination. Hence, I do not deem it appropriate safe to place reliance on the report Ex.PW-21/A and the same is accordingly rejected.