Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

34] PW.30 Hitesh Rathod is an officer in the Kores India Limited, Nagpur dealing in the maintenance and installations of the CCTV cameras. He had taken over from Shri Hemant Thakre. He CONF.1.2016 states that from the official record he came to know that eight CCTV cameras were installed on the petrol pump of Bharat Petroleum, namely, Sundar Auto Center at Bhokara, Nagpur. The purchase order and the invoices which are electronic generated documents are exhibited in his evidence at Exhs. 123 & 124. He states that the system of CCTV cameras installed at the premises of Sundar Auto Centre includes the device known as Network Video Recorder comprising hard-disc, LCD screen monitor and router with cameras in all eight in number. He further states that the capacity of the memory of the hard-disc was 2000 GB and it was of Seagate Company make.

He states that thereafter he checked and verified the CD and it was found that the CCTV footage were properly copied in the CD.

Therefore, he delivered the CD to the police for further process.

He states that thereafter he was informed by the Police Officer that he was in need of the hard-disc of the concerned CCTV footage. Therefore, he again verified the movements captured by the CCTV cameras. It was revealed that all the relevant recordings were intact. He got confirmed that the entire CCTV system was working in proper condition and thereafter he shut down the NVR system and removed the hard-disc from the NVR. Thereafter, he delivered the custody of the hard-disc to the police for further process. The police packed and sealed the CD and hard-disc in presence of himself, both panchas and Dr. Chandak. He states that thereafter he returned to his office, prepared the requisite certificate which was required to be issued under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act. Seizure panchanama is at Exh. 127. A certificate as required under Section 65-B is below Exh. 128 and affidavit and its accompaniments are below Exh. 129 & 129/1.

The scanned copies of the reference photographs are exhibited at Exhs. 161 to 165 in his evidence. He has also issued a certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act.

His evidence is sought to be attacked on the ground that he has only analysed the C.Ds. and not the hard-disc. However, he has categorically stated in his evidence that there would have been a risk about the integrity and problems in data accessing and data loss if he had analysed the hard-disc. It is further to be noted from the CONF.1.2016 evidence of this witness that he has carried out the analysis on the basis of face identification software programme. In his cross-

CONF.1.2016 The certificates under Section 65-B as has been observed by the Apex Court in para 15, have also been duly issued by PW35 Shrikant and PW30 Hitesh. The evidence regarding copying that information on the CD from the hard disc and regarding the seizure of the hard disc and the copy of the CD, has come in the evidence of PW35 Shrikant, PW30 Hitesh and PW48 Pratik Rathi. The evidence of PW47 Smt. Chitra Kamat would show that her office had received the material in sealed parcel. She had authorised PW38 Ajay Salunke to carry out the analysis. PW38 has carried out the analysis in the scientific manner. It will be relevant to note from the evidence of PW38 Ajay that he had generated the hash value of the CD. It will be relevant to refer to the information regarding file verification downloaded from Wikipedia: