Ghanshyambhai Madhavlal Patel vs State Of Gujarat & on 11 December, 2014
participatory role in a trial. They are not
expected to be tape recorders to record whatever is being stated by the
witnesses. Section
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 667 (2.56 seconds)Devinder Singh vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 26 March, 2014
voice of the Appellant on the tape.
(iii) The sanctity and purity of the tape recorded conversation was not
proved. The evidence to show that ... tape and the device on which it
was used could not be tampered with was missing. The tape recorded
conversation was also not played
State (Central Bureau Of ... vs R.P. Tiwari on 7 August, 2014
were there and they were playing a pocket tape recorder kept
on the table. Then those officials said to the Respondent that ... tape the conversation which
might take place in the room at the time of raid. It must be mentioned
that the tape recorder was played
N. Sri Rama Reddy vs Sh. V. V. Giri In Reference To A Tape on 12 May, 2014
tape recorded evidence as " real evidence". It was stated "
When a Court permits a tape recording to be played over ... Rama Reddy Vs Sh. V. V. Giri in reference to a tape
recorded conversation, while approving the decision in one
2
Scottish case " From
N. Sri Rama Reddy vs Sh. V. V. Giri In Reference To A Tape on 12 May, 2014
case Hon'ble Supreme Court had described
a tape recorded evidence as "real evidence". It was stated
"When a Court permits ... recorded (over recording in order to delete
some portion that too incamera). The indicated
datetimes of over recordings
Hon'Ble Supreme Court In Ritesh Sinha vs . Cbi Of 2013 [ (2013) on 12 May, 2014
recorded (over recording in
order to delete some portion that too in camera).
The indicated date, time of over recordings ... have been recorded during 2.11.02
to 7.11.02. There are indications that these shots
are being over recorded on a previously used tape.
The subsequent shots
Section 3 in The Companies (Meetings of Board and its Powers) Rules, 2014 [Entire Act]
meeting; (d) to store for safekeeping and marking the tape recording(s) or other electronic recording mechanism as part of the records of the company
Rajesh Gupta vs State Through Central Bureau Of ... on 25 March, 2014
State of Punjab
AIR 1959 SC 484.
27. As regards the tape recording, Mr. Nigam submitted that since it was
not played in the Court ... seen from the tape recording memo Ex. PW-3/D was found blank when it
was played in the trial Court. The second device
Sri N Rajanna vs State Of Karnataka on 26 June, 2014
aforesaid offences. He submits
that the complainant was given tape recorder by the
police before the registration of the crime and
this conduct ... tape recorder was given to the complainant who
recorded the conversation and ultimately, FIR was
registered. During the investigation, when the tape
recorder sent
Rangaswamy @ Thimma vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 February, 2014
police station, Tumkur stating therein that
a Sony company Tape Recorder fitted to his Tata Sumo
bearing registration No.KA-06-M-8448 was stolen ... punishable under Section 379 of IPC. During the
course of investigation, tape recorder was recovered from
the possession of PW-2 Gangadhar, who inturn stated