Report No. 94
In this decision,1 public policy, rather than fairness to the accused, was held to be the basis of the discretion of the court to exclude evidence obtained illegally. The factors considered relevant (or not relevant) are as under2:
(i) whether the law was deliberately or recklessly disregarded by those whose duty it is to enforce it;
(ii) whether the nature of the illegality affected the cogency of the evidence is not generally a factor to be considered, where the illegality deliberate or the result of recklessness;
(iii) case of compliance with the law;
(iv) the nature of the offence charged;
(v) whether there was a violation of statutory procedures;
(vi) the urgency of protecting perishable evidence;
(vii) the availability of alternative, equally cogent, evidence.
1. Bunning v. Cross, (1978) 19 AIR 641 (658).
2. Bunning v. Cross, (1978) 19 AIR 641 (663).