Tejasvi Surya mentions the recent acquittal of a politician in a hate speech case (Speaker asks him not to mention the name)  : He was acquitted on the premise that the person who recorded the speech did not provide the original DVR in which the speech was recorded. But the speech was telecast live and whole world watched. But the Court ruled that the digital evidence was not admissible since the person who recorded the original DVD did not supply it. So, all other copies available online were not accepted as primary evidence. This was a major lacuna in our Evidence Act, which is cured in Sakshya Bill. As per clause 57, "Where a video recording is simultaneously stored in electronic form and transmitted or broadcast or transferred to another, each of the stored recordings is primary evidence". Had this bill been there earlier, the person who made hate speech would have been