Section 9 A&C Act Relief Available Until Award Is Actually Enforced, Even After It Becomes Enforceable: Telangana High Court Matrimonial Litigations Must Not Degenerate Into Contests Of Mutual Humiliation By Weaponising Private Images: Delhi High Court Unarmed Witnesses’ Inaction Against Armed Assailants Justified By Instinct Of Self-Preservation; Testimony Cannot Be Discarded: Allahabad High Court Ocular Evidence Outweighs Motive: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based On Reliable Eyewitness Testimony Arrest Illegal If Written 'Grounds Of Arrest' Not Furnished To Accused; Communication Of Mere 'Reasons' Insufficient: Bombay High Court Absence Of Territorial Jurisdiction No Ground To Quash FIR At Threshold If Allegations Disclose Cognizable Offence: Calcutta High Court Proof Of Demand Is Sine Qua Non For PC Act Conviction; Voice Recordings Inadmissible Without Sec 65-B Certificate: Chhattisgarh HC Section 91 IEA | Disposition Of Immovable Property Cannot Be Proved By Oral Evidence If Written Document Not Produced: Delhi High Court NRC Legacy Data Extracts Inadmissible Without Section 65B Certificate; PAN Card & EPIC Not Proof Of Citizenship: Gauhati High Court Testimony Of Injured Witness Entitled To Great Weight; Minor Contradictions Due To Lapse Of Memory Cannot Discard Prosecution Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Kerala High Court Remands Teacher Seniority Dispute For Fresh Consideration To Verify If Senior Teacher Relinquished Promotion Claim Receipt Of DNA Report After Testimony Doesn't Automatically Confer Right To Recall Witness For Further Cross-Examination: Madhya Pradesh High Court Possession Of 'Bhang' Not An Offence Under NDPS Act, Specific Definition Excludes It: Jharkhand High Court Acquits Man Trial Court Cannot Reject Request For Handwriting Expert Merely Because Signatures Are On Photocopies: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Digitization of records in all criminal trials and civil suits now mandatory, directs Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 24 April 2023, Supreme Court in a Judgement, JITENDRA KUMAR RODE Vs UNION OF INDIA , directed the Registrar General of all High Courts to ensure that the digitization of records is duly undertaken in all criminal trial cases and civil suits, with promptitude at all District Courts, preferably within the time prescribed for filing an appeal within the laws of procedure. The Court also directed the concerned District Judges to ensure that the digitized records are verified as expeditiously as possible and a continually updated record of the Register of Records digitized is maintained with periodic reports being sent to the concerned High Courts for suitable directions.

The Court observed that the language of Section 385 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 mandates the Court sitting in appeal to call for the records of the case from the concerned Court below, peruse them, and then decide the appeal. The Court held that failure to comply with this mandate would result in a violation of Article 21.

In the present case, the Appellate Court had upheld the conviction of the accused even though the relevant Trial Court record could not be reconstructed and the essential documents necessary to appreciate the appeal on its merits were not available. The Appellate Court had held that the counsel for the accused, who filed the appeal, must have perused the record at the time of filing the appeal. However, the Supreme Court held that the job of the Court of Appeal is not to depend on the lower Court's judgment to uphold the conviction but to come to a conclusion based on the record available before it.

The Court further held that, in certain cases contingent upon specific facts and circumstances of the case, non-compliance with the mandate of Section 385 would result in a violation of Article 21. However, the Court also observed that ordering a retrial in cases where the time elapsed since the commission of the offence is significant and the essential documents such as the FIR or witness statements are not available, would not be in the interest of justice and would not serve any fruitful purpose

The Court also directed the Registrar General of all High Courts to ensure that the digitization of records is duly undertaken in all criminal trial cases and civil suits, with promptitude at all District Courts, preferably within the time prescribed for filing an appeal within the laws of procedure. The Court also directed the concerned District Judges to ensure that the digitized records are verified as expeditiously as possible and a continually updated record of the Register of Records digitized is maintained with periodic reports being sent to the concerned High Courts for suitable directions.

JITENDRA KUMAR RODE Vs UNION OF INDIA

Latest Legal News