IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Shamsher Singh Verma … Appellant
State of Haryana …Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1525 OF 2015
November 24, 2015
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.
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.”
In R.M. Malkani vs. State of Maharashtra , 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.
In Ziyauddin Barhanuddin Bukhari vs. Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra and others2 , 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.”
Complete Judgement Shamsher-Singh-CD-Document