Allahabad High Court Deems Illegally Obtained Phone Recordings as Admissible Evidence
In a pivotal judgment, the Allahabad High Court has declared that phone conversations recorded without legal authorization can still be accepted as admissible evidence.
This decision emerged from a case involving a criminal revision plea against a trial court’s verdict. The trial court had previously dismissed a discharge application presented by Mahant Prasad Ram Tripathi, the erstwhile CEO of a Cantonment Board, who was embroiled in corruption allegations.
Tripathi was implicated for purportedly demanding a bribe amounting to ₹1.65 lakh, channeled through Shashi Mohan, a member of the same board. In a strategic move, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) recorded a telephonic exchange between the two accused individuals. This was executed by activating the speakerphone and capturing the conversation using a digital voice recorder. During this recorded dialogue, Mohan is alleged to have informed Tripathi that
“6 percent of the amount had been paid.”
In response, according to the CBI’s account, Tripathi confirmed with a simple ‘yes’. However, as Mohan tried to further the conversation, Tripathi purportedly interjected, cautioning him,
“to talk in the office.”
Challenging the corruption charges, Tripathi’s primary line of defense was to question the legitimacy of the recorded conversation as evidence. Representing him, his counsel contended that the recording contravened the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act. Specifically, they highlighted that
“Section 5 of the Indian Telegraph Act permits interception of communication only in certain contingencies, and that too under the orders of the government.”
This groundbreaking verdict by the Allahabad High Court accentuates the evolving parameters of evidence admissibility, suggesting that the substance of evidence might sometimes overshadow the method of its procurement.
