https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184258 A contemporaneous tape-recorded conversation was held admissible when the accuracy of the recording, the identity of the speakers, and the absence of tampering were proved; it could be treated as res gestae and corroborative evidence. The Court further stated that a voluntary conversation with a decoy witness was not a statement to a police officer within Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and did not infringe Article 20(3) because there was no compulsion or coercion. On the bribery charge under Section 165-A of the Indian Penal Code, the decoy witness, investigating officer, and tape recording together were treated as sufficient to sustain the conviction, while the sentence was reduced to the period already undergone. en-us Wed, 19 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jul 2016 13:25:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184258 A contemporaneous tape-recorded conversation was held admissible when the accuracy of the recording, the identity of the speakers, and the absence of tampering were proved; it could be treated as res gestae and corroborative evidence. The Court further stated that a voluntary conversation with a decoy witness was not a statement to a police officer within Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and did not infringe Article 20(3) because there was no compulsion or coercion. On the bribery charge under Section 165-A of the Indian Penal Code, the decoy witness, investigating officer, and tape recording together were treated as sufficient to sustain the conviction, while the sentence was reduced to the period already undergone. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184258