Accused Loses Right To Default Bail By Acquiescence If Extension Orders Are Challenged Only After Chargesheet Filing: Supreme Court AP High Court Orders Release Of Vehicle Seized For Mineral Transport Violations Upon Payment Of Penalty, Says Rules Don't Mandate Indefinite Detention Short Time Gap Between 'Last Seen' And Death Clinches Murder Conviction Against Fired Driver: Allahabad High Court Court Must Restore Possession To Dispossessed Party If Ex-Parte Decree Is Set Aside Even If Property Descriptions Differ: Andhra Pradesh High Court Management Cannot Deny Compassionate Appointment Citing Delay If It Failed To Maintain Service Records: Calcutta High Court Long Possession Alone Does Not Establish Tenancy; Burden Of Proof Lies On Person Claiming Status Of Tenant: Bombay High Court Consent Of Minor Immaterial: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction But Acquits Man Of Kidnapping Charges Notional Income Of Minor In Motor Accident Claims Must Be Based On Minimum Wages Of Skilled Workmen: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹56.8 Lakhs Revenue Records Serve Only Fiscal Purpose, Cannot Be Treated As Proof Of Title To Property: Supreme Court Executing Court Cannot Grant 'Deemed Extension' Of Time For Deposit In Specific Performance Decree: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Becomes Inexecutable If Balance Sale Consideration Not Deposited Within Stipulated Time: Supreme Court Supreme Court Protects MSMEs From Closure Over Missing Environmental Clearance If Pollution Boards Were Unaware Of Requirement Industrial Units Operating With Valid PCB Consents Can't Be Closed Merely For Technical Want Of Prior Environmental Clearance: Supreme Court Punishment On Charge Not Framed In Show Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Reduces Doctor's Penalty To Censure Plea Of Acquiescence Cannot Defeat Lawful Title Claim When Encroachment Is Established: Madras High Court Board Of Revenue Can't Quash Unchallenged Orders While Exercising Revisional Jurisdiction: Orissa High Court Penetration To Any Extent Sufficient For Offence Under POCSO Act; Intact Hymen No Bar For Conviction: Meghalaya High Court Expeditious Conclusion Of Summary Force Court Trial Not Arbitrary If Procedure Followed; ITBPF Act Self-Contained: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Doesn't Bar Appeal Filed Prior To Withdrawal Of Earlier Defective Appeal Against Same Order: Madhya Pradesh High Court Appointment Of Receiver Is An 'Extreme Remedy', Cannot Be Ordered Lightly Especially After Decades Of Inaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court

High Court Upholds Importance of Photographic Evidence in Civil Disputes: Relevant for Adjudicating Rival Claims

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling that underscores the importance of photographic evidence in civil litigation, the High Court of Delhi, led by Hon’ble Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, has set a precedent in the careful examination and admittance of such evidence in legal disputes.

The judgment, dated November 20, 2023, revolved around a contentious civil suit where the petitioner, Vikas Mohan, sought to introduce three black and white photographs to establish the pre-existence of a structure, termed ‘kholki’, which was at the heart of the dispute. The decision to allow these photographs as evidence came after meticulous consideration of their relevance to the case.

Justice Arora, in her observation, highlighted the significance of these photographs, stating, “the said photographs would be relevant for adjudicating the rival claims of the parties; subject to the Petitioner proving the said photographs in accordance with law.” This statement not only allowed the submission of the photographs into evidence but also set a benchmark for the standard and relevance of photographic evidence in civil litigation.

The judgment further addressed the issue of the delay in submitting evidence, emphasizing that the trial court should consider the impact of this delay on the credibility of the evidence during evaluation. Despite the delay, the court found it imperative to include the photographs for a comprehensive understanding of the case.

The court also imposed a cost of Rs. 20,000 on the petitioner for the procedural delay, reflecting the court’s stance on ensuring adherence to procedural norms and timeliness in legal proceedings.

This decision has been perceived as a significant move in legal circles, as it reinforces the role of photographic evidence in unraveling the truth in legal disputes, especially in civil cases where the burden of proof plays a crucial role.

Date of Decision: 20 November 2023

VIKAS MOHAN  VS RAJINDER SINGH (DECEASED)

Latest Legal News