NDLI: P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep Vs. State of Kerala and Anr.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Evidence Act Right to fair trial of accused Art.21 1872 ss.3 and 65B s.207 definition of document Cr.P.C
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Evidence Act, 1872: ss.3 and 65B – Document – Whether the contents of a memory card/pen drive being electronic record as predicated in s.2(1)(t) of Information Technology Act would qualify as a document within the meaning of s.3 of Evidence Act and s.29 of IPC – Held:The basis for classifying an article as a ‘document’ depends upon information which is inscribed and not on where it is inscribed – Definition of ‘evidence’ as envisaged u/s.3, clearly takes within its fold documentary evidence to mean and include all documentary evidence to mean and include all documents including electronic records produced for the inspection of the Court – The provisions in s.65B of Evidence Act, s.95(2)(b) of Cr.P.C., s.29 of IPC, and definition of document in General Clauses Act, reinforce that electronic records ought to be treated as ‘document’.Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.207 – Furnishing of documents to the accused – Held: Furnishing of documents to the accused is a facet of right to the accused to a fair trial enshrined in Art.21 of the Constitution – Section 207 does not empower the Magistrate to withhold any ‘document’ submitted by the Investigating Officer except when it is voluminous – If the document/record is electronic, the ground for non-furnishing the document it being voluminous can not be invoked – Therefore, all documents including ‘electronic record’ produced for the inspection of the Court alongwith the police report and which prosecution proposes to use against the accused, must be furnished to the accused as per the mandate of s.207 – The contents of the memory card/pen-drive must be furnished to the accused in the form of cloned copy.Constitution of India: Art.21 – Right to fair trial of accused and right to privacy of victim – In offence of rape – Competing rights – Balancing of – Held: Though the accused is entitled to have copies of the statements and documents accompanying the police report, which the prosecution may use against the accused – Nevertheless, the Court cannot be oblivious to the nature of offence and the principles underlying the amendment to s.327(2) of Cr.P.C. and 228A of IPC, for securing the privacy and identity of the victim – Balancing of rights of both the parties is imperative – In such cases, the Court may be justified in providing only inspection of the documents to the accused and his lawyer or expert for presenting effective defence during the trial – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.327(2) – Penal Code, 1860 – s.228A.Interpretation of Statutes: Ongoing statute – Interpretation of - Held: Code of Criminal Procedure, being an ongoing statute, it is presumed that the legislature intended the Courts to apply a construction that continuously updates its wordings to allow for changes and compatibility with the contemporary situation. Words and Phrases: “data” and “electronic record” – Meaning of, in the context of Information Technology Act, 2000. “document” - Meaning of in the context of Evidence Act.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 1303
Petitioner	P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep
Respondent	State Of Kerala And Anr.
SCR	[2019] 17 S.C.R. 422
Judgement Date	2019-11-29
Case Number	1794

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep Vs. State of Kerala and Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

Miss Xyz Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr

Vinubhai Haribhai Malvaiya and Ors. Vs. The State of Gujrat and Anr.

Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and Another

Boby Vs. State of Kerala

Juhru & Ors Vs. Karim & Anr.

Gannmani Anasuya and Ors. Vs. Parvatini Amarendra Chowdhary and Ors.

Madan and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

State of U.p Vs. Govind Das@ Gudda and Anr.

S. Arul Raja Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep Vs. State of Kerala and Anr.

P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep Vs. State of Kerala and Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Miss Xyz Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr

Vinubhai Haribhai Malvaiya and Ors. Vs. The State of Gujrat and Anr.

Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and Another

Boby Vs. State of Kerala

Juhru & Ors Vs. Karim & Anr.

Gannmani Anasuya and Ors. Vs. Parvatini Amarendra Chowdhary and Ors.

Madan and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

State of U.p Vs. Govind Das@ Gudda and Anr.

S. Arul Raja Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep Vs. State of Kerala and Anr.