In Brief
In this criminal appeal, four accused persons challenged their convictions for abduction and murder of Ramesh Jain on the ground that Call Detail Records (CDRs) relied upon by the trial court lacked the mandatory certification under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act. The Supreme Court held that objections concerning the mode or method of proof must be raised when evidence is first tendered at trial, not for the first time at appellate stage. Since the accused failed to object when CDRs were admitted, they could not later challenge their admissibility. The Court upheld the conviction based on the complete chain of circumstantial evidence, including oral testimonies, recoveries from disclosure statements, and the CDRs, which collectively proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeals were dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.