Abstract

Different common law systems address the admission of evidence obtained illegally and improperly in different ways. Therefore to effectively understand its current position and implications to be followed in India, the current paper has two chapters, with the first one comparatively analysing the evidentiary rules from various nations in relation with the admissibility of evidence illegally obtained and showcasing the theoretical underpinnings of the various laws in these various jurisdictions ascertaining whether the general discretion of courts across different jurisdictions regarding the inclusion or exclusion of relevant evidence which are illegally or improperly obtained serves the same purpose. Moving ahead the second half of the paper talks about the position of such evidences in India as if it is included then will be in direct conflict and violation of Right to privacy, a facet or right to life. In contrast to other jurisdictions where unlawfully obtained evidence is eliminated, Indian courts have regularly permitted such evidence in criminal prosecutions in the light of statutory or constitutional provision asserting the exclusion of the same. This paper glances on the 94th Law Commission Report’s recommendations from 1983 in light of the recognition of the right to privacy as a fundamental right with specific reference to K.S. Puttaswamy case’s take on such evidences. To that end, this article in the second part will first examine the present legal position as stated by the judiciary and explore the reasoning behind those declarations.

Keywords