Accused entitled to advanced forensic examination of electronic evidence to establish plea of alibi.

The petitioner is an accused in a murder case registered on May 13, 2020, involving a fatal assault on one Sikandar

The investigation was handled successively by the local police, the CID, and the CBI

The petitioner raised a plea of alibi, claiming he was at his residence and a nearby school during the occurrence. The CCTV footage from both locations (a pen drive and a hard disk/DVR) was seized during the investigation

While the report for the residence was filed, the CFSL Bhopal reported on June 8, 2021, that the school’s hard disk could not be detected or analyzed due to technical limitations and a lack of compatible forensic tools

The Trial Court rejected the petitioner’s application under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. to send the hard disk to a more advanced laboratory, such as CFSL Gandhinagar, ruling it unnecessary

The petitioner assailed this order before the High Court

1. Whether the denial of a request to examine electronic evidence by an advanced forensic laboratory, when the primary laboratory lacked the requisite tools, violates the right to a fair trial.

2. Whether the Trial Court erred in rejecting the application under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. for the retrieval and forensic examination of CCTV data essential to the defense's plea of alibi.

The court primarily applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973) regarding the inherent powers of the High Court

The court relied on the constitutional guarantee of a "Fair Trial" as a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which ensures that every accused is entitled to a reasonable opportunity to lead evidence in support of their defense

It also considered the procedural application of Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. (now under BNSS) regarding the production of documents or things necessary for the purposes of trial

The Court reasoned that since the CFSL Bhopal explicitly stated it could not render an opinion due to technical limitations and not due to the non-existence of data, the evidence remained unexplored

The Court found that the CCTV footage was material to the petitioner’s plea of alibi

By denying the request to send the hardware to a laboratory with advanced retrieval tools (like CFSL Gandhinagar), the Trial Court effectively deprived the petitioner of the opportunity to establish his defense, which causes significant prejudice

The Court emphasized that the interest of justice outweighs procedural delays, provided the trial continues on a day-to-day basis to prevent stagnation

The Court held that a fair trial necessitates providing the accused an opportunity to retrieve potentially exculpatory electronic evidence via advanced forensic means

The Trial Court was directed to transmit the hard disk/DVR to CFSL Gandhinagar or another advanced facility for examination. It further ordered that the trial proceed on a day-to-day basis and that the forensic examination should not stay the trial proceedings; however, the resulting report must be taken on record and considered in accordance with the law