Published on: 26 August 2023 at 16:31 IST
Court: Supreme Court
Citation: Ziyauddin Burhanuddin Bukhari V. Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra (1976)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Section 3 of the Evidence Act, 1872 includes electronic audio / video tape-records of speeches as “documents”. It is held that Audio and videotape technology has emerged as a powerful medium through which a first-hand information about an event can be gathered and in a given situation may prove to be a crucial piece of evidence.
Apex Court has laid down set of rules for the admissibility of such Audio Evidence to rule out the possibility of any kind of tampering with the record to ascertain the standard of proof about its authenticity and accuracy as compared to other documentary evidence.
19. We think that the High Court was quite right in holding that the 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.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
