Evidence Act, 1872–Secs. 65-B–Compliance to provisions–Case of the prosecution that R, the Asstt. Manager of Company collected the pen drive from the bag of co-accused O and handed over to Investigation Officer– Officer viewed the contents of pen drive in the laptop of the department and then prepared the seizure memo of same–No corroborative evidence to show that the pen drive was secured by R from the bag of co-accused–Whether the certificate issued by R u/s. 65B of the Act was admissible in evidence ?–Held, no–It is nowhere stated by R that he had watched /seen/listened to/went through the contents or the material contained in pendrive–Certificate issued by him cannot certify the authenticity of the contents or data inside the device–Rather, it is a certificate to the extent of existence of the physical device only–Even the copy of the contents of device made through the laptop of department cannot be taken as a copy of original contents as it is a copy of the copy of the original–Further, R was neither the owner of laptop nor having its possession–Further, the certificate was supplied after more than one and half months, that to without watching the contents of pendrive–Furthermore, the pen drive was received by ASP and it was kept in almirah for almost a day and, thereafter, it was sealed in presence of motbir witnesses of department–If the constables were to be taken as independent witnesses for the seizure, than the same could have been done on very same day.
