JUDGMENT - (1-18) ( His Lordship stated the facts as indicated in the Head-note and considered the evidence and then proceeded).

(19) The first contention made by Mr. Chari was that the conversation alleged to have taken place between the accused and the complainant and recorded on the tape with the help of the tape recording machine is not admissible as it is hit by S.162 of the Criminal Procedure Code. According to Mr. Chari, the circumstances in which the conversation was recorded would clearly establish that the statements, both of the complainant and the accused, recorded on the tape are in the nature of statements made to a police officer, and if these are statements made to a police officer, Mr. Chari contends that the ban imposed by S.162 of Cri P.C. would operate and the court cannot make use of this record for corroborating the complainant. Before examining the validity of this contention, it is necessary to refer to a few circumstances about which there is hardly any dispute. The first circumstance is that S.I. Mahajan was admittedly present in the inner room in Shaikhs house when the tape-recording machine was installed and when the alleged conversation between the compl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document