TOMASO BRUNO & ANR. versus STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [2015] 1 S.C.R. 721 · Decided: 20-01-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ANIL R. DAVE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 1 S.C.R. 721 
TOMASO BRUNO & ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. 
(Criminal Appeal No.142 of 2015) 
JANUARY 20, 2015 
[ANIL R. DAVE, KURIAN JOSEPH AND 
R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302134 - Murder - Prosecution 
case that two foreign nationals committed murder of another C 
foreign national on their trip to India as tourists - Offence took 
place inside the privacy of the hotel room in which the 
appellant and the deceased were staying together and only 
the appellants had the opportunity to commit the offence -
Appellants' case is that at the relevant time they had gone out 
D 
and on returning back to the hotel room found the condition 
of their friend very serious and immediately informed the hotel 
manager about the same and with the assistance of the hotel 
staff, took him to the hospital - On basis of the evidence, 
conviction and sentence uls. 302134 by courts below - On 
appeal, held: On facts, CCTV footage being a crucial piece 
of evidence, it is for the prosecution to have produced the best 
evidence which is missing - Non-production of CCTV footage 
being best evidence casts doubt on the prosecution case -
Courts below did not notice the faulty investigation as also the 
absence of symptoms of strangulation in the medical reports 
-
Circumstances and the evidence adduced by the 
prosecution do not form a complete chain pointing to the guilt 
of the accused - Appellants given benefit of doubt and the 
order of conviction set aside - Evidence. 
Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 658 - Admissibility of electronic 
records - Murder case -
CCTV cameras installed in the 
prominent places - CCTV footage - Effect of non-production 
- Held: CCTV footage is a strong piece of evidence to prove 
E 
F 
G 
721 
H 
722 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
whether the accused remained inside the room and whether 
they were responsible for the commission of a crime -
Omission to produce CCTV footage by the prosecution, which 
is the best evidence, raises serious doubts about the 
prosecution case. 
B 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. In the instant case, the courts below did 
not properly appreciate the evidence and the gap in the 
chain of circumstances sought to be established by the 
C prosecution. The courts below ignored the importance of 
best evidence i.e. CCTV camera and also did not notice 
the absence of symptoms of strangulation in the medical 
reports. Upon consideration of the facts and 
circumstances of the case, the circumstances and the 
D evidence adduced by the prosecution do not form a 
complete chain pointing to the guilt of the appellants-
foreign national and the benefit of doubt is to be given 
to the appellants. Thus, the conviction of the appellants 
u/s.302/34 IPC is set aside. [Para 42] [747-C-E] 
E 
F 
1.2. With the increasing impact of technology in 
everyday life and as a result, the production of electronic 
evidence in cases has become relevant to establish the 
guilt of the accused or the liability of the defendant. 
Electronic documents strictu sensu are admitted as 
material evidence. With the amendment to the Evidence 
Act in 2000, Sections 65A and 658 were introduced into 
Chapter V relating to documentary evidence. [Para 25] 
[737-E-F] 
G 
1.3. The appellants being foreign nationals who 
visited India as tourists, it would not have been possible 
for them to examine any witness either from the hotel or 
from the place which they are said to have visited as they 
were tourists in India. On facts of the case, to invoke 
H Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the burden was for the 
TOMASO BRUNO & ANR. v. STATE OF U.P. 
723 
prosecution to establish that the appellants remained 
A 
inside the hotel room at the relevant time. PW-1-Hotel 
Manager stated that CCTV cameras are installed in the 
boundaries, near the reception, in the kitchen, in the 
restaurant and all three floors. Since CCTV cameras were 
installed in the prominent places, CCTV footage would 
B 
have been best evidence to prove whether the accused 
remained inside the room and whether or not they have 
gone out and whether they were responsible for the 
commission of a crime. CCTV footage being a crucial 
piece of evidence, it is for the prosecution to have c 
produced the best evidence which is missing. Omission 
to produce CCTV footage which is the best evidence, 
raises serious doubts about the prosecution case. [Para 
21, 22] [736-B-G] 
1.4. PW 1-hotel manager stated that he saw the CCTV 
D 
footage at t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.