Electronic evidence subject to accurate and stringent test: Supreme Court

Holding that "standard of proof" in the form of electronic evidence should be "more accurate and stringent" compared to other documentary evidence, the Supreme Court has upheld the election of a Shiv Sena Lok Sabha candidate accused of making inflammatory speeches.

"If a stringent test of proof is not applied a serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the successful candidate whose election would not only be set aside, he may also incur disqualification to contest an election for a certain period, adversely affecting his political career.

"Thus a heavy onus lies on the election petitioner to prove the charge of corrupt practice in the same way as a criminal charge is proved," the apex court ruled.

A bench of justice DK Jain and justice P Sathasivam passed the judgement while upholding the election of Manikrao Shivaji
Kokate from Maharashtra's Sinnar seat in the 2004 parliamentary polls which was challenged by Tukaram Dighole, the defeated candidate of the NCP-Cong-RPI combine.

"Though it was neither feasible nor advisable to lay down any exhaustive set of rules by which the admissibility of such
evidence may be judged but it needs to be emphasised that to rule out the possibility of any kind of tampering with the
tape, the standard of proof about its authenticity and accuracy has to be more stringent as compared to other documentary evidence," the bench said.

Dighole had filed the appeal after the Election Tribunal of the Bombay high court dismissed his petition on the ground that the video cassette copy containing the alleged inflammatory speeches purportedly obtained from the Election Commission could not be established as genuine.

In other words, the tribunal was of the view that Dighole could not prove that the cassette copy was obtained from the Election Commission office as claimed by him since he could not support his claim with any proof.
    
It was the case of the defeated candidate that Kokate had made certain speeches for whipping up pro-Maratha sentiments thus adversely affecting his (Dighole's) electoral prospects.

Upholding the tribunal's order, the SC citing its earlier rulings said the success of a candidate who has won at an election should not be lightly interfered with.

Any petition seeking disqualification of an elected candidate should strictly conform to the requirement of the law, the bench said.

"Having pursued the material on record, we are in complete agreement with the tribunal that in the absence of any cogent evidence regarding the source and the manner of its acquisition, the authenticity of the cassette was not proved and it could not be read in evidence despite the fact that the cassette is a public document."
    
"No relevant material was brought to our notice which would impel us to hold that the finding by the tribunal is perverse, warranting out interference," the apex court said.