Call recordings have become an important form of evidence in legal proceedings. The admissibility of call recordings in Indian Courts has been a matter of debate and controversy for several years.

The Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are the primary legislations in relation to electronic records and admissibility of the same. The Information Technology Act, 1872 defines electronic record to include sound stored, received, or sent in electronic form and Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with electronic evidence, including call recordings and lays down the conditions for the admissibility of electronic evidence in legal proceedings. Section 85B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 pertains to the law on modifying recorded electronic evidence. To ensure authenticity and integrity, a digital signature must be affixed to sign the record.

To be admissible in Court, call recordings must fulfill certain requirements under Section 65B. The recording must have been made in the course of normal business, and the person making the recording must have been authorized to do so. Additionally, the recording must be accompanied by a certificate, signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the device that was used to make the recording.

The certificate must state that the electronic record was produced by the device that was used to make the recording, and that the recording was made in the course of normal business. The certificate must also state the particulars of the device used to make the recording, such as its make, model, and serial number. Furthermore, the certificate must confirm that the recording was not tampered with or altered in any way.

The admissibility of recorded electronic evidence in Court was examined in the case of S. Pratap Singh v The State of Punjab, where the Supreme Court accepted a tape-recorded conversation between two parties despite being obtained illegally. The Court evaluated the evidentiary value of the tape-recorded conversation and accepted it as evidence only because it was essential to resolving the case. The conversation was claimed to have occurred between the parties but was obtained illegally. The case provides insights into the factors that determine the admissibility of recorded electronic evidence, with the Court accepting the evidence solely because it aided in the conviction process.

In the case of Ratan Tata v. The Union of India & Ors, the disclosure of the recorded telephone conversations between Nira Radia and various other individuals involved in the 2G spectrum allocation scam raised several legal issues, with the two most significant legislations being the Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995 and the Information Technology Act of 2000. The Delhi High Court examined whether the contents of the conversations were debatable or confidential, while the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated the potentially influential nature of the tapes. Despite concerns regarding the admissibility of the recordings, since they were authorized to be recorded, they were accepted as admissible evidence. The central question in this case was whether authorized recording of telephone conversations could be deemed illegal if it defamed any party involved in the conversation.

The controversy surrounding the admissibility of the recordings was largely due to the fact that they were recorded without the knowledge or consent of the other parties involved in the conversation. The admissibility of such recordings in court is subject to various laws and regulations that seek to protect individuals' right to privacy. The Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 regulates the broadcasting of content on television networks and contains provisions relating to the privacy of individuals, while the Information Technology Act, 2000 sets out provisions relating to electronic records and digital signatures.

The Radia Tapes Case raised important questions about the balance between the right to privacy and the public interest in ensuring transparency and accountability in matters of governance. The case also highlighted the need for clear and well-defined laws and regulations regarding the admissibility of recorded electronic evidence in Court. Ultimately, the tapes were deemed admissible in evidence since they were authorized to be recorded, and their contents were considered relevant to the case at hand.

In the case of Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh, which extensively dealt with the admissibility and authentication of secondary electronic evidence. The Apex Court upheld the admission of electronic and oral evidence even in the absence of an authenticating certificate.

Conclusion
The admissibility of call recordings in Indian Courts depends on several factors, including the authenticity, accuracy, and reliability of the recordings, the relevance and probative value of the recordings to the issue in question, and the circumstances in which the recordings were made. The Supreme Court of India has provided guidelines and principles to determine the admissibility of call recordings, and lower Courts have interpreted these guidelines in several cases. As technology continues to evolve, it is likely that the admissibility of electronic evidence, including call recordings, will remain a subject of judicial scrutiny and interpretation. The admissibility of electronic evidence, such as recorded telephonic conversations and video clips, often raises concerns regarding the right to privacy. While electronic evidence is accepted in a Court of law, it is not legal for individuals to record conversations without authorization due to the violation of the Right to Privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and the increased risk of criminal activity involving the recorded conversation. The Courts have emphasized that the use of recorded conversations as evidence is only permissible when it helps to resolve a case and ensures successful criminal prosecution.

By - Vedanta Kishanchandani