LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIR All India Reports

IPC Indian Penal Code
NARCO Narcotics
Hon’ble Honorable
SCR Supreme Court Reports
Vol. Volume

LIST OF AUTHORITIES

A. BOOKS
1. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code (Lexis Nexis, 36th Edition).
2. S.N.Mishra The Code of Criminal Procedure (Central Law Publication 21st Edition).
3. Batuklal The Law of Evidence(Central Law Agency 23rd Edition).

B. CASE LAWS
1. SHAFI MOHAMMAD VS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ,AIR 2018 SC
714.

C. Commissions and Committee Reports

D. Research Papers

E. Statutes
1. The Indian Penal Code, 1860
2. The Evidence Act,1872
3. The Code of Criminal Procedure,1973
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble Court of Ld. AJM at Mumbai is the court of territorial Jurisdiction of the above
mentioned case no of 2018 on the Behalf of the State the relevant extract Under section 177
of the Code of Criminal Procedure ,1973 is reproduced hereunder for the kind Reference of the
Hon’ble Court.

Section 177 The Code of Criminal Procedure: The Ordinary Place of Inquiry and Trial.

Every Offence Shall Ordinarily be inquired into and tried by the Court Within whose local
Jurisdiction it was Committed

Thus, The Hon’ble Court is the Court of Rightful Jurisdiction to Call FOR Trial in This Case.

STATEMENT OF FACT

Peter Harmsworth and Deceased Alexa were Husband and Wife since 2013. Mr. Rajesh Gujral
and his wife Suneet Gujral are one of the few Friends the couple had. The Couple were living
apart since December 2019 After Alexa Got Pregnant Dr. Peter asked her to abort the child as he
claimed that he is not ready to start the family . on refusal Peter alleged that the Child Alexa is
expecting is of Rajesh . Alexa left the home and shifted to the Hotel close by. after request of
Rajesh and Suneet Gujral ,Alexa Started living with them . peter called Alexa few times coxing
her to return but she refused.

On 5th May 2020, peter called Alexa to his house saying that his parents wanted to meet her. He
expressed his desire that he wanted to sort out things between them so that both could get ahead
in their lives . alexa Along with Rajesh went to meet all of them on 11 th May2020. Peter parents
were not there of which peter explained that due to medical reasons, his parents could not
come.after dinner peter forced alexa to stay back for the night as it was late. Rajesh went back
home and told Alexa that he would pick her up after 10;00 A.M. the Next Morning.

Rajesh on reaching Peter’s House next morning found after ringing the doorbell for 5-6 minutes
called peter. He said head left for work at 7:00A.M and Alexa was nor answering his phone too.
Rajesh tried to pushed the front door he ingress inside upon searching he found Alexa hanging
in the bed room from fan . He called peter and Informed the Police.

The police made an inquiry report and sent the body for post mortem. The Post Mortem report
had mentioned Deep Laceration Around neck, Fractured Wrist and Abrasion on the right side of
the face, Hyoid Fracture. The police investigator collected whatever evidence they could find.
Peter was charged under section 306,316 and 325 of Indian Penal Code and was Arrested. The
Alexa (electronic device) was also taken as evidence. Alexa mini music player which was laying
on Peter’s bedside was not found at the time of search.

Rajesh during investigation confessed to the police that he had taken Alexa mini which was
lying on the bedside. Rajesh failed to explain how he got ingress into the house. Rajesh claimed
that if given Opportunity, he could retrieve the recording of the Alexa Mini and find out what the
last conversation was, since the word Alexa must have been mentioned. He is willing to do this if
he is not charged with offence of theft or any other offense under the law.

The prosecution claims that the last conversation in the room could have been recorded by Alexa
Mini that records conversation if the Word Alexa is Spoken Twice within its vicinity. Peter
Believes that Rajesh was holding the system to ransom . producing this evidence was invasion of
his privacy.

Peter had submitted his written consent to the NARCO analysis Examination and any other
relevant test to be performed. But Rajesh had refused to undergo any.

QUESTION RAISED

1. Whether Evidence from the Alexa devices is admissible in a court of Law?

2. Whether evidence stolen from the crime scene is admissible in a court Of Law?
3. Whether D.R Peter and Rajesh can be Subjected to NARCO analysis?
4. Whether Dr Peter can be charged under section 316,IPC?

SUMMERY OF ARGUMENT

1. Whether Evidence from the Alexa devices is admissible in a court of Law?

The section 65B of The Indian Evidence Act,1872 talks about Admissibility of the
Electronic Record . (1) Notwithstanding anything in this act , any information contained
in an electronic record which is printed on a paper ,stored ,recorded or copied in optical
or magnetic media produced by a computer shall be deemed to be a document, if the
conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and
computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings ,
Section 65B(4) in any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by
virtue of this section ,a certificate doing any of the following things that is to say-
a. Identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner
in which it was produced.
b. Giving such perticulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic
record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record
was produced by the computer.
2. Whether evidence stolen from the crime scene is admissible in a court Of Law?
Appliciblity of procedural requirement under section 65B(4) of Act of furnishing
certificate is to applied only when such electronic evidence is produced by person
who is in position to produce such certificate being in control of said device and not
opposite party. SHAFI MOHAMMAD VS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ,AIR
2018 SC 714.

3. Whether D.R Peter and Rajesh can be Subjected to NARCO analysis?

With the advance scientific discoveries working with there experts , the investigating
officer can read the mind of suspect and dig out concealed information and evidence.
The term NARCO analysis is right from Greek word “ NARKC” ( meaning
Anesthesia or Torpor) and is used to describe a Diagonistic and barbiturates , to
induce a stupor in which mental element with strong associated affects come to the
surface , where they can be exploited by the therapist. The term NARCO analysis was
coined by Horselley ever since the first reported use of criminal NARCO analysis in
1922, the process has been under the scanner with absolutely unflattering results .
Narco analysis was rather unheard in India till recent past. however , it has been in the
news in the past 1 year as new investigation techniques by various investigative
agencies in India.
The Narco analysis test is conducted by mixing 3 gram of sodium ,pentothal or
sodium amytal dissolved in 3000 ml. of Distilled water. In the narco anylysis test the
subject inhabitation are are lowered by interfaring with his nervous system at the
molecular level . in this state the subjectunlable to use its imagination and could not
make its answers. This test may filter the Probative Truth.

4. Whether Dr Peter can be charged under section 316,IPC?

Section 316, of IPC. Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to
culpable homicide. Whoever does any act under such circumstances, that if he
thereby caused death he would be guilty of culpable homicide, and does by such act
cause the death of a quick unborn child, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and
shall also be liable to fine.”
The ingredients which would be necessary to establish an offence under section 316
would be
(1) that the woman was quick with the child,
(2) that the accused did an act to cause the death of such child,
(2) that the circumstances, under which such act was done, were such as to make the
accused guilty of culpable homicide, if death had been caused, and
(4) that such act did cause the death of the quick unborn child.
In the present matter in hand, Alexa was pregnant with 22 weeks foetus according to
Post- Mortem Report which satisfies the first essential ingredient

ARGUMENT ADVANCE

I. WHETHER EVIDENCE FROM THE ALEXA DEVICES IS ADMISSIBLE

IN A COURT OF LAW?
It is very humbly submitted that the evidence from the Alexa devices is admissible in
a Court of Law. A virtual assistant is also known as an artificial intelligence assistant,
which means they understand what you’re asking for, and learn your preferences,
almost like a human assistant. Currently, there are many virtual assistants which are
slowly overpowering society with their upgrading features. Amazon Alexa, Siri,
Google Assistant, etc. are few virtual assistants which are making the life of users
more comfortable. Among these Amazon Alexa is used by most users all over the
world. Amazon Alexa is Amazon’s cloud-based voice service available on hundreds
of millions of devices from Amazon and third-party manufacturers. It is first
developed as Amazon Echo smart speaker and the echo dot, echo studio, and amazon
tap speaker. It is used as a home assistant and can control various home devices like
light on-off, fan on-off, and several other smart devices using its home automation
system. It is used for voice Interaction; playing music, providing information, reading
audio books, etc. It is available in different languages such as English, French,
German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Japanese, and Hindi. The virtual assistant was
developed for fun and to make the life of people more comfortable but with the
passage of time, the commission of the crime by the offender has drastically changed
due to technological development and it is acting as a catalyst for the courts to impart
justice.
1.1 Contemporary Instances: Alexa used as Evidences
The Arkansas Case – In November 2015, James Bates was charged with 1st
-degree murder of Victor Collins in his home. The case gained national attention
because, for the very first time, Alexa was treated as evidence in the court. Amazon
provided the voice recording with the consent of the accused. But the court found no
such crucial information and Bates got discharged from the Court. Further, in the
Double Murder Case of New Hampshire2, in January 2017, Timothy Verrill
was accused of murdering (stabbing multiple times) Christine Sullivan (48 years) and
Jenna Pellegrini (32 years) at the Farmington home but the accused pleaded not
guilty. During the investigation, police found the amazon echo devices on which the
prosecutor believed that it might contain some pertinent voice recordings. After that,
the Court in the State of Hampshire v. Timothy Verrill3 observed that servers or
records maintained by Amazon.com had recordings made by the Echo smart speaker
from the period of 27th January to 29th January 2017, and such information contained
evidence of crime against the accused. Therefore, the court directed Amazon to
produce the recording for the said periods made by echo smart speaker with Alexa
voice command capability.
Florida Murder Case4 – On 12th July 2019, Silvia Galva (32 years) was killed
suspiciously and it was alleged that her boyfriend Adam Reechard Crespo (43 years)
who was a prime suspect in this case might have killed her by stabbing. During the
probe, police found a smart home device i.e., Amazon Alexa echo dot, and believed
that it might have voice recordings of 11th and 12th July 2019 which could be crucial
evidence in solving this mysterious death. After that the police department had
received the recordings but according to the Democrat-Gazette, Amazon
spokesperson said that the information of an individual is only shared when there will
be a legally valid and binding order from the court and said that give the recordings
only after the legal team consented with the Amazon. After analyzing the recordings,
The Prosecutors said that there was no evidencein the recordings and the Judge
exonerated Adam Reechard Crespo from all charges.The aforesaid mentioned
instances are of the USA which is a common law country. India also being a common
law country has adopted and made changes in various laws previously by observing
the US court Judgments. Therefore, it is necessary for the Indian Government to make
changes in evidence law with technological advancement.
US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit - 875 F.2d 954 (1st Cir. 1989).

1.2 Evidentiary Value of Alexa in India

The Evidence Act, 18725 is a colonial law that is evolving with technological
advancement. As crime and its modes of commission have been increasing rapidly,
this leads us to add electronic gadgets as evidence. The concept of electronic evidence
has been introduced through the Information technology Act, 20006 and further
amendments were made in the Act, Indian Penal Code, 18607, and some other related
provisions. As per Section 2 (t) of the IT Act, “electronic record means data, record or
data generated, image or sound stored, received or sent in an electronic form or
microfilm or computer generated microfiche.” Electronic records can be treated as
evidence under Section 3 of the Act which says that“„evidence‟ means and includes
all documents including electronic records produced for the inspection of the Court;
such documents are called documentary evidence.” Alexa which is a technologically
advanced artificial intelligence records our data in the form of voice recordings that’s
why it can be treated as documentary evidence. Even this device has been called as
evidence by the foreign court in the aforementioned instances. In India, the Supreme
Court in K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy8 observed that the telephonic conversation
recording could be valid evidence according to Section 3 of the Evidence Act and
Section 2 (t) of the IT Act subject to certain conditions. The voice recordings of Alexa
can be extracted as evidence in two ways, i.e., cloud storage and voice record History.
From the aforementioned arguments, it is very humbly submitted that the evidences
from the Alexa devices are admissible in a Court of Law.
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2795-2796 OF 2011.
II. WHETHER EVIDENCE STOLEN FROM THE CRIME SCENE IS
ADMISSIBLE IN A COURT OF LAW?
It is very humbly submitted that the evidence stolen from the crime scene is
admissible in a court of Law. To understand its admissibility, it is important to
understand the concept of evidentiary admissibility in general and the principle of
relevancy in specific.
The principle of evidentiary admissibility which drives any interpretation of evidence
in India is the principle of relevancy found in Section 59 of the Evidence Act, 1872.
This principle of relevancy can be understood better by referring to the definition of
―relevant fact in Section 2.10
“Any fact is relevant to another if the fact in question relates to the other fact in any
manner under the Evidence Act, 1872.”
Sections 24 to 30 which contain the relevant provisions on admissibility under Indian
law do not, in any form, discuss illegality in obtaining evidence as a ground. Hence, it
is not surprising that the general position in Indian law has been fixed on considering
evidence relevant regardless of the illegality in obtaining the same.
In R.M. Malkani case11, the question before the Supreme Court concerned the
admissibility of a conversation recorded through a tape-recording instrument attached
to the telephone of the informant. The Supreme Court held that a piece of evidence is
admissible even if it is illegally obtained unless the Judge exercises their discretion to
consider such evidence inadmissible if it operates unfairly against the accused.
However, in implementation, judgments applying R.M. Malkani case12 have rarely,
or never, given this benefit to the accused. While dealing with the violation of Article
21 of the Constitution and the right to privacy, the Court regressively observed that
protection by courts against
11 R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra, (1973) 1 SCC 471.
12 Id. wrongful or high-handed interference from the executive would not be given to
guilty persons who violate the law, but only to those persons who are innocent. This
perspective of the Court suggests an approach within the criminal justice system
where the ends justify the means, and the achievement of a conviction or a committal
is placed on a higher pedestal than questions of individual freedom or privacy.

In Pooran Mal case21, similarly, the Supreme Court again regressively laid down that
the only way to test the admissibility of evidence in India would be the test of
relevancy which is laid down under Section 5 of the Evidence Act, 187222. Thus, it
was the Court's opinion that any claim of a breach of fundamental rights cannot
exclude evidence obtained from an illegal search.23 This position has been continued
to be maintained by the Supreme Court as recently as in Bharati Tamang case24.... In
the present matter in hand, the evidence of stolen Alexa device was not illegally
obtained by the investigating authority. The evidence was legally obtained and as far
as its relevancy with the case is concerned, since it can have the recording of the
conversation between Peter and Alexa immediately before the incident of death, the
evidence is highly relevant in the present case.
III. Whether Dr. Peter and Rajesh can be subjected to Narco analysis?
With the advance scientific discoveries working with there experts , the investigating
officer can read the mind of suspect and dig out concealed information and evidence.
The term NARCO analysis is right from Greek word “ NARKC” ( meaning
Anesthesia or Torpor) and is used to describe a Diagonistic and barbiturates , to
induce a stupor in which mental element with strong associated affects come to the
surface , where they can be exploited by the therapist. The term NARCO analysis was
coined by Horselley ever since the first reported use of criminal NARCO analysis in
1922, the process has been under the scanner with absolutely unflattering results .
Narco analysis was rather unheard in India till recent past. however , it has been in the
news in the past 1 year as new investigation techniques by various investigative
agencies in India.
The Narco analysis test is conducted by mixing 3 gram of sodium ,pentothal or
sodium amytal dissolved in 3000 ml. of Distilled water. In the narco anylysis test the
subject inhabitation are are lowered by interfaring with his nervous system at the
molecular level . in this state the subjectunlable to use its imagination and could not
make its answers. This test may filter the Probative Truth.

IV. WHETHER DR. PETER CAN BE CHARGED UNDER SECTION 316 IPC?
It is very humbly submitted that Dr. Peter can be charged under Section 316 of IPC as
all the essential ingredients of committing an offence under section 316 has been
fulfilled by Peter.
“316. Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide.—
Whoeverdoes any act under such circumstances, that if he thereby caused death he
would be guilty of culpable homicide, and does by such act cause the death of a quick
unborn child, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to ten years, and
shall also be liable to fine.”
The ingredients which would be necessary to establish an offence under section 316
would be
(1) that the woman was quick with the child,
(2) that the accused did an act to cause the death of such child,
(2) that the circumstances, under which such act was done, were such as to make the
accused guilty of culpable homicide, if death had been caused, and
(4) that such act did cause the death of the quick unborn child.
In the present matter in hand, Alexa was pregnant with 22 weeks foetus according to
Post- Mortem Report which satisfies the first essential ingredient.
Secondly, Peter’s act resulted in the death of quick unborn child because as per post-
mortem report, Alexa had a fractured wrist and an abrasion on the right side of the
face which clearly shows that Peter had assaulted her. He forced her to hang from the
fan to give the incident a pretence of suicide. As a result of such an act by Peter,
Alexa died and the child in her womb also died which satisfies the second important
element of committing an offence under Section
316 IPC.
The third important ingredient is that the circumstances were such that if the death is
caused then the accused is guilty of culpable homicide. The present instance clearly
shows mens rea on the part of Peter to cause death of Alexa. The way he assaulted
Alexa shows that he intented Alexa to die. When Alexa got pregnant, Dr. Peter asked
her to abort the child as he claimed that he was not ready to start a family. On her
refusal, Peter got livid. He rebuked Alexa for leaving the job to which Alexa refused.
Peter even went on to allege that the father the baby she was expecting was probably
Rajesh. There were rumors too of Peter being in a relationship with Suneet
Gujral.When confronted, both Peter and Suneet denied everything. Due to too much
of work pressure,Peter censured Alexa and even assaulted her once. This shows that
Peter and Alexa did not shared a good relationship and because of such differences,
Peter forced Alexa and their child to die.Since in the present case, the quick unborn
child in the womb of Alexa died as a result of death of Alexa, Peter can clearly be
charged under Section 316 of IPC.
IV. Whether Dr. Peter and Rajesh can be subjected to Narco analysis?
With the advance scientific discoveries working with there experts , the investigating
officer can read the mind of suspect and dig out concealed information and evidence.
The term NARCO analysis is right from Greek word “ NARKC” ( meaning
Anesthesia or Torpor) and is used to describe a Diagonistic and barbiturates , to
induce a stupor in which mental element with strong associated affects come to the
surface , where they can be exploited by the therapist. The term NARCO analysis was
coined by Horselley ever since the first reported use of criminal NARCO analysis in
1922, the process has been under the scanner with absolutely unflattering results .
Narco analysis was rather unheard in India till recent past. however , it has been in the
news in the past 1 year as new investigation techniques by various investigative
agencies in India.
The Narco analysis test is conducted by mixing 3 gram of sodium ,pentothal or
sodium amytal dissolved in 3000 ml. of Distilled water. In the narco anylysis test the
subject inhabitation are are lowered by interfaring with his nervous system at the
molecular level . in this state the subjectunlable to use its imagination and could not
make its answers. This test may filter the Probative Truth.

PRAYER
IN LIGHT OF THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE, ISSUES RAISED,
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED AND
AUTHORITIES CITED, THE PROSECUTION HUMBLY PRAYS BEFORE THIS
HON‟BLE COURT TO KINDLY
ADJUDGE THAT-
I. The evidence from the Alexa devices is admissible in a Court of Law.
II. The evidence stolen from the crime scene is admissible in a Court of Law.
III. Dr. Peter and Rajesh can be subjected to NARCO Analysis.
IV. Dr. Peter can be charged under Section 316, IPC.
V. It is a fit case where the Court can add a charge u/s 302 IPC and try the accused
person for that charge as well.
Or
ANY OTHER RELIEF THAT THE HON‟BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO
GRANT IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE, EQUITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE COUNSEL SHALL DUTY BOUND
FOREVER PRAY.
All of which is humbly and most respectfully submitted.