LANDMARK CASE
Tomaso Bruno v. State of Uttar Pradesh
(2015) 7 SCC 178 · Supreme Court of India · Evidence
At a glance
- Citation: (2015) 7 SCC 178
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Evidence
- In one line: An adverse inference was drawn, and the accused were acquitted.
1 Facts
CCTV footage that could show the truth was not produced by the prosecution.
2 Issue
What happens when best evidence is withheld?
3 What the court decided
An adverse inference was drawn, and the accused were acquitted.
4 Why it matters
Stresses digital evidence in investigations.
5 Think about it
Why must police secure CCTV early?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Evidence
- Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473
- Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1
- Bipin Shantilal Panchal v. State of Gujarat (2001) 3 SCC 1
- Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor AIR 1939 PC 47
- Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 801
- State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1961 SC 1808
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank v. State of KeralaTRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.