“………..11. Word
“document” is defined in Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, as under:
- “ ‘Document’ means any matter expressed or described upon any substance by
means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means,
intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that
matter
Illustration
:A writing is a document; Words printed, lithographed or photographed are
documents; A map or plan is a document; An inscription on a metal plate or
stone is a document; A caricature is a document.”
12. In
R.M. Malkani vs. State of Maharashtra (1973) 1 SCC 471 : 1973 (2) SCR 417 ,
this Court has observed that tape recorded conversation is admissible provided
first the conversation is relevant to the matters in issue; secondly, there is
identification of the voice; and, thirdly, the accuracy of the tape recorded
conversation is proved by eliminating the possibility of erasing the tape
record.
13. In Ziyauddin Barhanuddin Bukhari vs. Brijmohan
Ramdass Mehra and others (1976) 2 SCC 17 : 1975 (Supp) SCR 281 , it was held by this Court that tape-records
of speeches were “documents”, as defined by Section 3 of the Evidence Act,
which stood on no different footing than photographs, and that they were
admissible in evidence on satisfying the following conditions:
“(a) The
voice of the person alleged to be speaking must be duly identified by the maker
of the record or by others who know it.
(b)
Accuracy of what was actually recorded had to be proved by the maker of the
record and satisfactory evidence, direct or circumstantial, had to be there so
as to rule out possibilities of tampering with the record.
(c) The
subject-matter recorded had to be shown to be relevant according to rules of
relevancy found in the Evidence Act.”
No comments:
Post a Comment