Discussion
The Investigating Officer conducting investigation of a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 collects the call details of the mobile phones held by the accused from whom, recovery of drug was effected and the conspirator, who supplied the drug. Such call details:-
Answer: C
The key is relevant only if the conversation between the two accused is recorded and proved at the trial.
Call detail records show only that two phone numbers were in contact at certain times, and not what was said. The first option overstates them: courts have treated such records as showing contact, which needs corroboration (the recovery, a recorded conversation or other links) before a charge of conspiracy can rest on it. Several High Court bail orders on NDPS cases hold that call records of contact with a co-accused do not by themselves prove conspiracy.
The second option is also wrong, because electronic records of this kind are admissible when proved in the manner section 65B of the Evidence Act requires.
Of the three, the keyed option is the closest to that position. I did not find a Supreme Court decision that states the rule in the words of the keyed option, and the word 'only' is strong, so treat it as the best of three weak options and not a settled statement of law.
Post your comment
Please log in or register to post a comment.
Examination Categories
- SSC Exams
- Banking Exams
- Teaching Exams
- Civil Services Exams
- Railways Exams
- Engineering Recruitment Exams
- Defence Exams
- State Government Exams
- Police Exams
- Insurance Exams
- Nursing Exams
- Other Government Exams
- NRA CET
- PG Entrance Exams
- Campus Placement
- MBA Entrance Exams
- CUET and UG Entrance
- Judiciary Exams
- Regulatory Body Exams
- Software Development