STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PRAKASH VISHNURAO MANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HIS Lordship after narrating the facts of the case and discussing the evidence on record, his Lordship dealt with the law relating to tape -recording and proceeded. It seems to be by now settled that there is no difference in principle between a tape -recording and photograph; accordingly, a tape -recording is admissible in law provided that its accuracy can be proved and the voice properly identified and that the evidence was relevant and otherwise admissible, as held in Regina v. Maqsud Ali [1966] 1 Q.B. 688 : [1965] 2 All E.R. 464. It was held in that case that the Court would not lya down any exhaustive set of rules by which admissibility of such evidence could be judged, for it always had to be regarded with caution and assessed in the light of all the circumstances of each particular case and that but for the fact that the tape -recorder was a mechanical device, it was no different from an eavesdropper. It was also decided that since the defendants in that case were not in custody and no caution was required, the use of the tape -recorder could not be said to operate unfairly against them; the method of taking the tape -recording could not affect its admissibility which still remained a matter for the discretion of the Judge.

(2.) THE Court further laid down that a transcript of tape -recording was obviously a convenience and an aid to a jury, provided that they were guided by what they heard and baaed their ultimate decision on that, In that particular case it was held 'that since all the translations had been submitted to detailed and searching cross -examination and since the evidence of all the translators was fully discussed, there were no grounds for interfering with the exercise of the discretion of the trial Judge; and at p. 702 Marshall J. observed: It is next said1 that the Recording was a bad one, overlaid in places by street and other noises. This obviously was BO and as a result much of the conversation was inaudible and undecipherable. In so far as that was so, much of the conversation was never transcribed but there still remained much that was transcribed, and the judge after full argument ruled that what was deciphered should be left for the jury to assess. We think that he was right.

(3.) IN Yusufalli v. State of Maharashtra : 1968CriLJ103 , the Supreme Court considered the relevancy and admissibility of tape -recorded evidence, holding in that case (p. 149):.The tape record of the dialogue corroborates his testimony. The process of tape recording offers an accurate method of storing and later reproducing sounds. The imprint on the magnetic tape is the direct effect of the relevant sounds. Like a photograph of a relevant incident, a contemporaneous tape record of a relevant conversation is a relevant fact and is admissible under Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act. In Rup Chand v. Mahabir Parshad , a tape record of a former statement of a witness was admitted in evidence to shake the credit of a witness under Section 155(3) of the Indian Evidence Act. The case was fallowed in Manindra Nath v. Biswanath (1962) 67 C.W.N. 191. In S. Pratap Singh v. The State of Punjab : (1966)ILLJ458SC , the tape record of a conversation was admitted1 in evidence to corroborate the evidence of witnesses who had stated that such! a conversation had1 taken places. In Regina v. Maqsud Ali, a tape record of a conversation was admitted in evidence, though the only Witness who overheard it was riot conversant with the language and could not make out what was said. If a statement is relevant, an accurate tape record of the statement is also relevant and admissible. The time and place and accuracy of the recording must be proved by a competent witness and the voices must be properly identified. One of the features of the magnetic tape recording is the ability to erase and re -Use the recording medium. Because of this facility of the erasure and re -use, the evidence must be received with caution. The court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the record has not been tampered with.