<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (3) TMI 756 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280248</link>
    <description>Hard discs containing intercepted telephonic conversations were treated as electronic records and therefore documents for pre-charge supply, along with CDs copied from them. The prosecution was required to furnish only the documents it relied upon or had already forwarded to court, and the court could not generally compel disclosure of every item gathered in investigation. Additional supply could be ordered where the charge sheet itself showed reliance on further material. Denial of all gathered material did not, by itself, breach fair-trial rights. Access to the recordings could be limited to relevant conversations, with direct inspection in the presence of court and counsel rather than mirror-image copies of entire hard discs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2022 11:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 756 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280248</link>
      <description>Hard discs containing intercepted telephonic conversations were treated as electronic records and therefore documents for pre-charge supply, along with CDs copied from them. The prosecution was required to furnish only the documents it relied upon or had already forwarded to court, and the court could not generally compel disclosure of every item gathered in investigation. Additional supply could be ordered where the charge sheet itself showed reliance on further material. Denial of all gathered material did not, by itself, breach fair-trial rights. Access to the recordings could be limited to relevant conversations, with direct inspection in the presence of court and counsel rather than mirror-image copies of entire hard discs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>