Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

For the purpose of identifying these 20 sheets, they are marked as "Mark-I to Mark-XX". The transcript materials were retrieved from the Database by her competent staff, Inspector, Bhaba Kumar Bora (PW20), which was subsequently translated into English by other skilled staff who are conversant with the Bodo language as well as the English language.

XIX. PW-21, Shri Partha P D Sarma, Sr. Scientific Officer (Physics), testified that on instruction and authorisation of the Director of Forensic Science, Assam, he recorded the voice samples of the accused in Central Jail along with the NIA team and two officers of Assam Civil Service, who attended the proceeding as witnesses. He recorded the voice samples of the accused Nitul and three others using scientific methods and devices. He recorded the same in a sterile CD (Material Exhibit-2), and NIA prepared Exhibit-36 voice recording Memo. He also recorded the voice samples on three other sterile CDs, i.e., Material Exhibits 3, 4 & 5. He identified the signatures of other witnesses in the aforesaid exhibits. According to him, the accused persons voluntarily and willingly provided their voice samples.

XX. PW-32, Pronob Bora, a Scientific Asstt., Digital Forensic Unit, FSL, Guwahati stated that on 19.06.2015, he was assigned task of recording voice samples of some detainees of Central Jail, Guwahati and accordingly recorded the voice sample of accused Bishnu Narzary @ N. Berama, Sanju Bordoloi @ Sibigiri & Ajay Basumatary @ Buhum by using linear PCM Voice Recorder, Model No. DDR 5300 by adopting scientific methods in presence of witness. PW32 proved the willingness memo of Bishnu Narzary @ N Berama as Ext. 60 and his signature as 60/1 and signature of accused Bishnu Narzary @ N. Berama as Ext. 60/2. He also proved the willingness memo of Sanju Bordoloi @ Sibigiri as Ext. 61, his signature as 61/1 and signature of accused Sanju Bordoloi @ Sibigiri as Ext. 61/2. He also proved the willingness memo of accused Ajay Basumatary @ Buhum as Ext. 62, his signature as Ext. 62/1 and signature of accused Ajay Basumatary @ Buhum as Ext. 62/2.

66. The prosecution has further sought to establish involvement of the accused through intercepted telephone conversations, call detail records, voice samples and recovery of the cadre list of the NDFB (S) militants and their cash receipt records.

67. Now, let us scrutinize such projection of the prosecution.

68. PW-19 deposed regarding lawful interceptions under the Telegraph Act and the production of a transcript and a stored compact disk. However, she admitted that she did not intercept the call herself; that original CDs were not shown to her in the Court; and that she was not acquainted with the Bodo language.

80. Thus, although the prosecution has sought to establish conspiracy through intercepted telephone conversations, call detail records, and voice samples, the electronic evidence placed on record is replete with legal infirmities, as set forth hereinabove.

81. The voice samples were without proper certification, and the expert opinion merely states that the voices are "possible", which is far from conclusive. These lapses strike at the root of the admissibility and reliability of the electronic evidence.