sound recording is made, various independent/subsequent sound
recordings can be made, and each of which subsequent sound recording would be
original sound recording ... dealing is permitted even with the original copyright work
being the original visual recording and/or the original audio recording, then, surely
other storage media much less any CD in which the original
audio recording in question was copied by the FSL was supplied ... proved. As mentioned above, the original mobile phone
could not be played.
9.9. Thus, the original audio recording could not be proved in the present
being used by Ashu Khan. Allegedly this memory card contained
original audio recordings done by Ashu Khan for demand of bribe by
the accused.
Judgment ... audio
clip and claimed that it could be voice of accused or Rajeev Pandey.
These audio clippings mentioned above were the audio
recordings contained
appellant have not been proved to be those of the original audio
recordings. The Tribunal finally held that since the contents of the
cassette ... extent that when
the original document is a "public document" secondary
evidence is admissible even though the original document is
still in existence
audio can be authenticated only after examining the
actual recording devices (carrying the source audio files), which were used
to record the original conversation ... 1162 of 2023
original recording device, which were used during the alleged conversation.
Admittedly, the original recording device was not examined. In the absence
examined the audio files contained in the pen drive and no alteration in the audio
recordings were found. Also, the audio files in the mobile ... requisite conditions for
admissibility of the audio recordings in this case were fulfilled. The audio
recordings of the conversations between the accused and PW4, though
issuance of audio recording device to this witness.
Importantly, the witness also admitted that he did not
preserve the original recording in the recording device ... Jain. The witness admitted that he also did not
seize the original audio recording device. When the witness
was asked as to existence
importance. CW4, in his examinationinchief, tendered a
copy of the original footage of the entire programme telecasted on the relevant date
and time ... panelist, joined the programme
through video conferencing, or if her prerecorded video was played. In his evidence
Digitally signed by
RAGHAV RAGHAV SHARMA
SHARMA
voice sample was recorded in
FSL, Rohini on 06.08.2015. Sample voice of the accused was recorded in original
audio cassette marked as SVNK ... electronic evidence is concerned, admittedly the original audio-video
recording could never be recovered in the present case. Therefore, this part of
evidence
hear
any audio recording, therefore, he cannot state whether the transcript
Mark P-18/2 contained true account of the audio recording ... with the questioned audio
recording.
13.2. Also, the voice sample of the accused did not match with the questioned
audio recording and the voice sample
