When Courts can rely on TAPE RECORDED on mobile as Evidence in Court- some hints

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

'Ek tha Tiger and Ek thi Cow" - A story to explain why people file false cases.

Once upon a time in India there was rule of law. All citizens and animals were law abiding.


One day a cow crossed path of a Tiger. The Cow said to Tiger, "Hi, Good Morning".


The tiger gave no reply. He went straight to police station and gave complaint that The Cow has assaulted on him with her horns.


Police called the cow to police station but took no action against Cow for one month.


Tiger went to Court, engaged a lawyer and filed complaint against cow. The Magistrate recorded statement of Tiger on oath. Two more tigers came as witnesses who claimed to have seen the incident. They gave statements in support of tiger.


Magistrate issued non bailable warrant against Cow.


Cow engaged a lawyer and filed Sec. 482 petition in High Court to quash the complaint as abuse of criminal law.


High Court dismissed petition of Cow. High Court asked cow to appear before trial court and to prove her innocence in trial.

The Cow went to appeal in Supreme Court under Art.136. There also her petition was dismissed by Supreme Court. Supreme Court gave same advice to cow.


The Cow appeared before Magistrate and obtained bail pending trial.


Then case was adjourned many times for three years. On each day Cow had to come to court. She was always very frightened because in Courts she saw that lots of tigers and criminals were crowding around her.


One day she agreed to pay few lakhs rupees to Tiger. Tiger agreed and case was withdrawn.


The Cow become free for a price.


MORALS OF STORY


1) Most of the evidence in Indian courts are words of mouth. Witnesses and complainants can easily tell lies in court.


2) Courts have power to punish those who tell lies in court. But for many reasons they cannot do so.


3) The Cow should not have said 'Good Morning' to Tiger.


4) Aggression is best defense.


The cow should have also immediately filed (1) Complaint for malicious prosecution against Tiger and Two other tigers who gave false statement in Court. (2) Cow should also have filed Civil Suit for damages against three tigers. Then all three cases would have proceeded in Court side by side.


Warning: Do not treat this story as advice. Consult your advocate for correct advice.


IN MY VIEW, 40% Criminal Cases in courts in India are cases where, The Tigers have filed false cases against Cows. (Shocking Truth)


If you think that this story can help people to fight better against false cases, please tweet this to spread awareness.


Haresh Raichura


23/8/2012

Why some judgements of Supreme Court and High Courts confuse me- A brief view

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