Evidence Law Digest- Evidence Law - Tape Recorded Conversation

Lawzonline.com

Home

Discussion Forum

Communities

Professional Search

Law Dictionary

Bare Acts

Law Schools

State Bare Acts

Free Judgement Search

Law quotes

Articles | Humor | Law Digest

Search Law digest:

Index - Evidence Law

S. Pratap Singh v. State of Punjab (SC)

Tape recorded conversation cannot be direct or primary evidence, but only a corroborative evidence.

Yusufalli Esmail Nagree v. State of Maharashtra (SC)

Tape Recorded conversation is a relevant fact and is admissible under s. 7 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Ram Singh v. Col. Ram Singh (SC)

Conditions for admissibility of a tape recorded statement, Tape recorded conversation, Evidence law.

N. Sri Rama Reddy, etc. v. V.V.Giri (SC)

Tape recorded statement can also be be used to contradict the evidence given before the court and to test the varacity of the witnesses.

R. v. Maqsud Ali

Tape recorded conversation should always be regarded with some caution and assessed in the light of all the circumstances of each case.

R. v. Robson

Injustice could arise from admitting the tapes in evidence and that they ought not to be excluded on this basis.

R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (SC)

A contemporaneous tape record of a relevant conversation is a relevant fact and is admissible under section 8 of the Evidence Act.

R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (SC)

Even if, evidence is illegally obtained it is admissible.

R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (SC)

The fact that tape recorded conversation can be altered is also borne in mind by the Court while admitting it in evidence.

R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (SC)

Protection under 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution is not for the guilty citizen against the efforts of the police to vindicate the law and prevent corruption of public servants.

Ziyauddin Burhanuddin Bukhari v. Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra & Ors (SC)

Tape recorded conversation when duly proved by satisfactory evidence of what was found recorded and of absence of tampering, it could, subject to the provisions of the Evidence Act, be used as substantiative evidence.