Almost every mobile phone has voice recording functions. Technology has armed us with weapons of Voice Recording and Video Recording.

But can court convict someone by relying on such recorded evidence?

There are cases and cases where courts have convicted criminals on basis of tape recording.

Court usually wants to know following things before relying on such evidence.

1) Was recording done under controlled conditions? Has anyone come in witness box to say that he himself has recorded or that he was a witness to recording?

2) Are the content of recording same as they were when it was recorded? Is there any possibility that the recording could have been tempered with or doctored with after it was recorded?

3) Has any one come in witness box to say that “After recording was made, recording was kept in his safe custody till it was produced in court” ?

If Court satisfies, it can rely on recording.

(Some mobile phone may have “Non editable Recording Software”. If there is such an application, court can rely on it without any hesitation.)

Haresh Raichura

28/8/2012

I have utmost respect to judges of Supreme Court and High Courts. But I am also of firm view that we should criticize and give feedback to judges about their judgements.

Some judgements confuse me.

What is argued is different, and what is being decided is different.

Sometimes I feel that real issues are sidestepped.

Judges are more knowledgeable than me and are more experienced than me. They must be doing right thing.

In Courts, normally, a point is raised by one advocate, it is denied or explained by other side advocate, and then judge decides THAT issue.

However, in one judgement, a very senior judge wrote like this:

1. Petitioner’s advocate argued point A,B and C.

2. Respondent’s advocate contended point E,F and G. (Pause here and understand mistake. Respondent’s advocate has to reply to A,B and C points raised by petitioner’s advocate. But he does not reply A,B or C. Instead he spills out his own different issues E,F and G)

3. After recording arguments of both sides, Judge says, “The Following Points H and I are arising for our consideration.”

And Then he answers and decides points H and I which were never argued by any advocate!

There may be some very good reasons why some judges are doing like this. Sometimes pleadings are vague. Sometimes arguments by advocates are vague. Then a judge has to cull out issue from the real controversy.

But for my parts, I always become confused by reading such judgements.

Sometimes I feel that A, B and C were the REAL ISSUES which have been sidestepped by judges and judgement is weak on issues A, B and C.

If you also think that this point needs to be replied or addressed by some eminent judges or more experienced lawyers, please TWEET this post on social media for more awareness.

Haresh Raichura
21/8/2012