Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

14. Here in the present matter at hand, the NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1243/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/07/2024 undefined petitioner wife has produced hash value of the CD and even a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act and the transcript of the conversation between herself and her husband and other family members. The conversation between them is a relevant matter in issue. The petitioner as a wife wants to prove the cruelty which she faced in four walls of the matrimonial house. The identification of the voice would not be a question as recorded in the CD when the petitioner as a wife declares it to be the voice of the husband and other family members with whom she had been living alone from the date of her marriage. The accuracy of CD has been proved by placing on record the hash value. As is noted in the referred judgment in the case of R.M. Malkani (supra) in Paragraph 23 contemporaneous tape record of a relevant conversation is relevant fact and is admissible under Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is res gastea. It is also comparable to a photograph of the relevant incident and the tape recorded conversation is therefore relevant fact and is NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1243/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/07/2024 undefined admissible under Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act. Here in this matter, there is no dispute about the identification of the voices. The petitioner as a wife has identified the voice of her husband and other family members. Thus, in that circumstances, and in view of the ratio laid down in the case of R.M. Malkani (supra), the CD as produced at Mark 38/1 would be an admissible evidence.

19. In the family matters, all such documents would become admissible irrespective that those documents become relevant or not or could not be proved in accordance to the Indian Evidence Act. Here in this case, the petitioner had tried to assist the Court by making a prayer by moving application Exh.46 to get further evidence for the CD which she had produced on record. The report of the FSL authority would have been for the assistance of the Court. The CD itself becomes an admissible evidence in view of the decision in the case of R.M. Malkani (supra) and Ziyauddin Burhannuddin Bukhari (supra), more so being a matrimonial matter, the parties need not prove the documents or the statement or any other report in accordance to the Indian Evidence Act, without even falling for the relevancy or the admissibility of all those documents, which become part of the trial, it NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1243/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/07/2024 undefined gets admitted as evidence. Here in the present case, when the wife has already produced the CD and transcript of the CD on record, identifying the voice of the husband and other family members, she need not prove more than that on record. However, to assist the Court and to prove the reliability of the CD, she has placed on record the hash value and even the certificate under Section 65B.

The identification of the voice would not be question, since it is the wife who is identifying the voice of husband and in-laws with whom she had stayed together during the matrimonial life. Though recording would be without the knowledge of husband and family members but the conversation between the persons recorded and placed on record by way of CD is relevant to the matter in issue of domestic violence. The wife by producing the hash value and Section 65B certificate as per the Indian Evidence Act has prima facie proved that there is no erasing or tampering in the recorded NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/1243/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/07/2024 undefined conversation. Now the issue which relates is whether the Magistrate has the power to direct the person to give voice samples. It becomes relevant to note that the proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate are under DV Act and the proceedings are dealt with as per the criminal procedure Code. As per the provision of law, the respondent cannot be considered as an 'Accused' till there is breach of protection order. Here the prayer was not for a direction to any police to collect voice sample of any accused, but an order to both the parties, for the giving their voice sample.