Appreciation of evidence in case of tape recorded evidence or video footage
We also need to deal with various applications filed by Mr. Anand. In Crl. M. No. 13782 of 2007 Mr. Anand has sought leave to cross-examine Ms. Agarwal. It is the submission of Mr. Anand that there are material contradictions in the affidavits of Ms. Agarwal in regard to the sequence of events and the attendant circumstances relating to the sting operations. In our opinion, we are not directly concerned with the affidavits filed by Ms. Agarwal except to the extent that she has placed on record a true copy of the contents of the chips, that is, the video recording of the sting operations and the transcriptts of the conversations that had taken place between the dramatis personae. The chips are the primary material and there is nothing to suggest that in her affidavits Ms. Agarwal adds to or detracts from the actual contents of the chips. We have only to see the contents of the chips (which we have) and decide whether the noticees have committed contempt of Court or not. Cross- examination of Ms. Agarwal will not add to the material on record nor will it subtract anything from it.
What is important to appreciate in the present case is that it is a rather unusual one, particularly in terms of the material available. In run of the mill cases of contempt of Court, there is usually a complainant who brings forth either oral or documentary evidence that relates to the past conduct of the alleged contemnor. Such material can b
What is important to appreciate in the present case is that it is a rather unusual one, particularly in terms of the material available. In run of the mill cases of contempt of Court, there is usually a complainant who brings forth either oral or documentary evidence that relates to the past conduct of the alleged contemnor. Such material can b
