#Section 65-B Evidence Act

Bombay High Court rules that substantive justice prevails over procedural technicalities, admitting photographic and digital evidence under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act despite minor procedural lapses. The judgment reinforces that trial courts must avoid hyper-technical approaches that undermine the merits of a case, particularly in property disputes involving demolition.

Bombay High Court ruled that confessions lacking signatures are inadmissible under Section 25 of the Evidence Act, and CCTV evidence without a Section 65-B certificate cannot be relied upon. The acquittal in this POCSO murder case underscores the critical role of procedural compliance in criminal trials, impacting admissibility of key evidence.

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.

Delhi High Court holds that summary suits may be decreed without leave to defend if defence raises only technical, unsubstantiated objections without disclosing a triable issue.