Bombay High Court rejects ransom-call evidence without Section 65B certificate in 2012 Kandivali murder acquittal

In acquitting Manishprasad Gaud of the 2012 Kandivali child kidnapping and murder, the Bombay High Court rejected the prosecution's ransom-call evidence because no call detail records, nodal officer reports, or Section 65B certificates were produced to link the recovered SIM card and phone to the calls. The voice-expert report was never brought on record, and the trial court itself had recorded it as negative for the accused. Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pooranmal v. State of Rajasthan on the necessity of a Section 65B certificate, the bench held that recovery of articles alone could not supply the missing link to the offences. Sources: LawTrend, Free Press Journal (Lawtrend, Freepressjournal)

• In acquitting Manishprasad Gaud of the 2012 Kandivali child kidnapping and murder, the Bombay High Court rejected the prosecution's ransom-call evidence because no call detail records, nodal officer reports, or Section 6
• The voice-expert report was never brought on record, and the trial court itself had recorded it as negative for the accused.
• Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pooranmal v.