Topic
Chain of custody in Indian law refers to the documented, unbroken handling of evidence from seizure to court presentation, critical in cases under NDPS, POCSO, and electronic evidence rules.
The Court held that total non-compliance with Section 52-A NDPS Act breaks the chain of custody, making the FSL report inadmissible and leading to acquittal, highlighting procedural safeguards protecting accused persons from flawed-evidence convictions.
Kerala High Court acquitted the accused in a murder trial, ruling that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence due to inadmissible electronic records under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The judgment underscores the critical role of forensic integrity and procedural compliance in criminal convictions based on circumstantial evidence.
Chhattisgarh High Court acquitted the accused in an NDPS case, ruling that broken chain of custody and failure to prove exclusive possession invalidate prosecution evidence. The judgment underscores strict procedural compliance as a prerequisite for conviction under the NDPS Act, impacting drug-related prosecutions nationwide.
Himachal Pradesh High Court rules that police testimony alone suffices for conviction under NDPS Act when contraband is recovered during patrolling, even without independent witnesses. The court upheld a heroin possession conviction while reducing the sentence from five to one year on proportionality grounds, clarifying that seal non-production is not fatal if specimen impressions are exhibited.
Bombay High Court ruled that material discrepancies in the description of seized contraband (wet vs. dry ganja) undermine the prosecution's chain of custody, justifying bail even for commercial quantities under the NDPS Act. The ruling sets a precedent for scrutinizing forensic documentation in narcotics cases.
Uttarakhand High Court acquitted an accused in a POCSO case, ruling that unreliable identification due to darkness, absence of a test identification parade, and a broken chain of custody vitiated the prosecution's case. The court also emphasized the failure to confront the accused with the FSL report under Section 313 Cr.P.C., setting a precedent for strict adherence to evidentiary standards in sexual offence cases.
Patna High Court acquitted an accused under the NDPS Act after finding that the prosecution failed to produce the seized ganja in court, despite a forensic report confirming its nature. The court ruled that non-production of physical evidence breaks the chain of custody, rendering the conviction unsustainable even with scientific validation.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court acquitted an accused under the NDPS Act, ruling that the prosecution's failure to involve independent witnesses during contraband recovery-despite nearby habitation and passing vehicles-creates reasonable doubt. The judgment underscores that procedural compliance, including proper sealing and witness participation, is mandatory to sustain convictions under the Act.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court overturned an NDPS conviction after the prosecution failed to maintain an unbroken chain of custody for seized contraband and did not examine the accused under Section 313 CrPC - even though forensic reports confirmed the substance. This ruling reinforces that procedural integrity in evidence handling and accused rights are non-negotiable pillars of fair trial, not mere technicalities.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that electronic evidence, including call detail records, is inadmissible without a valid Section 65-B certificate. This ruling overturned a conviction reliant solely on circumstantial evidence, setting a strict precedent for the admissibility of digital records in criminal trials.
Chhattisgarh High Court holds that mere possession of WhatsApp messages or screenshots is insufficient to prove child pornography charges without authenticating source, intent, and chain of custody.
Orissa High Court holds that failure to produce written consent under Section 50 NDPS Act and non-compliance with Section 55 renders conviction unsustainable.
Bombay High Court acquits accused in forgery case, holding that prosecution must prove authorship of altered document and accused's knowledge of forgery beyond reasonable doubt.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that DNA reports cannot sustain conviction without proof of chain of custody and expert testimony, reinforcing evidentiary standards under CrPC.
Kerala High Court acquits accused due to failure to prove tamper-proof chain of custody for seized ganja samples, reinforcing evidentiary rigor under NDPS Act.