The Punjab and Haryana High Court held in a recent ruling the investigating officer can consider the text messages exchanged via Whatsapp in order to corroborate his findings in a crime investigation, however it is mandatory that there should be a certificate granted by Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act to produce the same as an evidence in the findings. Without certification under Section 65B, the same has no value in the eyes of law.
Wanted To Stay Updated & Gain Knowledge. Join us on Telegram Here.
Case of the Petitioner
The Court was hearing a plea for grant of regular bail in a case registered under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1987. Petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petitioner has been falsely accused by relying on the statement of the co accused as well as his own statement; both of the statements cannot be relied upon.
Case of the Respondent
The counsel appearing on behalf of Narcotics Bureau, submitted that almost 57,000 tablets of tramadol hydrochloride were recovered from the petitioner, which certainly is a quantity that is used for commercial supplies, the counsel submitted.
A co accused confessed that he was told by the petitioner to deliver a parcel on his behalf and the co accused claimed that he was completely unaware from the content of the parcel. Notably, the co accused stressed upon the screenshots of Whatsapp messages which were available with the Narcotics Control Bureau, which directly linked the petitioner with the contraband.
One of the messages also had some content pertaining to transfer of certain amount of sum to the account belonging to the husband of the co accused. Thus relying on the messages exchanged via Whatsapp, the counsel for the NBA claimed that there are other persons too involved in the sale and purchase of the contraband.
Observation of the Court
The question that the Hon’ble Court raised was is certification granted under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act in order to given evidentiary value to the messages exchanged between the petitioner and the co- accused, as the Court reiterated that without such certification, the same cannot be produced as evidence before this Court.
The Court referred the judgment of Supreme Court in case Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal and others, wherein it was stated that certification is mandatory to give it evidentiary value. Thus in the present case these messages are of no value in the eyes of law, the Court stated.
Next in line was the mismatch in the statements made by him and the co- accused, the claim by the petitioners that he is falsely framed, the Court cited a Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu wherein it was held that statements made to Narcotics officers were not confessional statements and thus cannot be used by themselves to be relied upon during trial.
Thus by making these observations, the Court allowed the bail plea and held that there is no concrete evidence to keep the petitioner behind the bars until certification is granted.
Case Details
Before Punjab and Haryana High Court
Case Title: Rakesh Kumar Singh v. State of Haryana
Coram: Hon’ble Ms. Jaishree Thakur
0 Comments