Can Illegally Obtained Evidence Like Theft or Espionage Be Used in Court? Let's Discuss

Validity of Evidence in Court

I have a question regarding the validity of evidence presentable in court. Can one side produce evidence that has been obtained through illegal means such as theft, corporate espionage, or similar? Will the evidence or any conclusion derived from it become inadmissible due to being "the fruit of a poisoned tree"?

Thank you for your question. In legal proceedings, evidence that has been obtained through illegal means, such as theft or corporate espionage, is generally considered inadmissible. This principle is often referred to as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. According to this doctrine, if evidence is found to be a direct result of illegal activities, it is tainted and cannot be used in court.

Courts aim to discourage illegal behavior and uphold the integrity of the legal system by excluding evidence that has been unlawfully obtained. However, there are exceptions and nuances to this rule, so it is essential to seek legal advice to understand how the specific circumstances of a case may impact the admissibility of evidence.

Admissibility of Documents in Court

A blanket opinion cannot be given as to whether such documents would be admissible. I personally know a case where a writ petition filed against the company was dismissed because the petitioner had annexed a lot of documents that were found to have been stolen from office records. Upon being pointed out about this, the High Court promptly dismissed it, saying, "those who seek equity must come with clean hands."