I think it has same evidentiary value like other evidences, unless it is rebutted or challanged by opposit party, that voice in this recording is not related to him. Otherwise opposit party may request to court for forensic report to confirm that whether voices are related to parties or it is edited / tampered .
in a typical extrotion case the victim had a tele talk recording in which it was threatened by the accused that give me 10 lacs or else i will implicate in criminal cases of dowry etc.., the victim later gave complaints in the police but it was not paid any heed by them, finally the victim was booked in a false dowry case by the accused....on this the victim apppraoched court & filed extortion case.... evidence filed was that tele call recording.......
in such cases, the tele call is the direct recording, how can it be corrobroative, such recording is more relaible than indiviudal witnesses who can turn up at any point....
once parties are in a dispute of matrimony after separation they start accusing each other of nonsense allegations.
in such cases communication between husband & wife in form of letters is a very important unbiased evidence. this was judgement by SC in 80s. in fact these communication is more reliable evidence than oral evidence as that is biased. times have changed now anybody hardly writes a letter to wife . so smses and phone records have taken place of thse letters. if supported by oral evidence this corroborative evidence can be a very strong factor in a case.
In my case, just after 6 months of marriage, my FIL called up my sister, and informed her that I am physically unfit to produce child. And he has come to know this fact from my wife and my MIL. He also told my sister that I need to go to a doctor for treatment.
I have the recorded mobile conversation of this. Can I produce it in the court during the 498a trial as evidence that my in-laws alwyas created problem right after the marriage.
I have got some other conversations of me with my wife's cousine sister, where she says that she knows that I am not guilty, and its her sister who is causing the nuisances.
Recording of voice sample-need a specific provision_ sec.45 of evidence act mks evdnce of an exprt upon a point of law or of science or art or as to identity of handwriting or fingr impression admissible.but evedence of an exprt on comparison of voice sample with disputed one has not been made admissible undr any provision of evidence act.Vinod vs. State 1981 Cri Lj927pustimargiya vs. A.D.J.,rajsamanand,AIR 2009 raj.9