can mobile calls voice recording prove wifes adultry.
In India, various courts have held that unilateral recording between husband and wife is not admissible in evidence as it is a breach of privacy. However, even though it is not admissible, it can tilt the verdict in your favour.
You cannot record telephone conversations unilaterally. You need to ask police to investigate by providing the date, time, source phone and destination phone number, area call received etc. Then, it becomes a record and positive evidence
After section 65, section 65A and 65B of Indian evidence act, 1872, have been added laying down the provisions about Admissibility of electronic records.
Also in a number of court judgments, judges have taken the evidentiary value of call recording to be highly significant, provided the person recording the same, should be prove its reliability and genuineness, which can bed done by submitting the same at Directorate of Forensic Science Laboratories
In Siddhartha Vashishta versus State (NCT of Delhi) – AIR 2010 SC 2352: the court held the details of a telephonic conversation very important, relevant and admissible piece of evidence. In S. Pratap Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1964 SC 72 a five judges bench of Apex Court considered the issue and clearly propounded that tape recorded that tape recorded talks are admissible in evidence and simple fact that such type of evidence can be easily tampered which certainly could not be a ground to reject such evidence as inadmissible or refuse to consider it, because there are few documents and possibly no piece of evidence, which could not be tempered with. You need to submit tape recorded of the conversation & corroborate the evidence of witnesses who had stated that such a conversation has taken place.
Evidentiary value of a call recoding has been proved and given importance in following cases:
- N Sri Rama Reddy etc v V V Giri AIR 1971 SC 1162
- Ram Singh & Ors v Ram Singh AIR 1986 SC 3
- RM Malkani v State of Maharashtra AIR 1973 SC 157
- S Pratap Singh v The State of Punjab AIR 1964 SC 72
- Tukaram S Dighole V Manikrao Shivaji Kokate 2010 2 SCALE 109
- Yusufalli Esmail Nagree v State of Maharashtra AIR 1968 SC 147
- Ziyauddin Burhanuddin Bukhari v Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra & Ors AIR 1975 SC 1788
Therefore, though the telephonic conversation can help you fight the case of adultery. It will not help you will the case solely, until and unless corroborated with other evidences, like witnesses.
This depends on HOW you have recorded the conversation. Tape recordings of conversations have repeatedly been held to be admissible as evidence by courts. However, this does not mean telephone tapping is legal. Telephone tapping is subject to the following laws such as Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, which grants the Government the power to order the interception of messages; Rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951, which lays down the procedural requirements which must be followed for telephone tapping to be legal; Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which deals with the power to issue directions for interception or monitoring or decryption of any information through any computer resource; Information Technology (Directions for Interception or Monitoring or Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009.
Under these laws, the tapping of telephones by third parties is generally illegal, unless the procedures set down law are followed.
Now, if you are sure that the way you have recorded the conversation is legal, then according to Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, evidence includes all documents, including electronic records, produced for the inspection of the Court.
The Court has held that audio or audio-visual technology could also be treated as admissible evidence in a court of law under Order 18 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The Supreme Court has laid down the following conditions for the admissibility of tape recorded conversation:
a) The voice of the speaker must be duly identified by the maker of the record or by others who recognize his voice. If the maker has denied the voice, it will require very strict proof to determine whether or not it was really the voice of the speaker.
b) The accuracy of the tape recorded statement has to be proved by the maker of the record by satisfactory evidence.
c) Every possibility of tempering with or erasure of a part of a tape recorded statement must be ruled out otherwise it could be held inadmissible.
d) The statement must be relevant according to the rules of Evidence Act.
e) The recorded cassette must be carefully sealed and kept in safe or official custody.
f) The voice of the speaker should be clearly audible and not lost or distorted by other sounds or disturbance.
 Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India AIR 2003 SC 189,
 Ram Singh v. Col. Ram Singh AIR 1986 SC 3
Book a phone consultation with a top-rated lawyer on Lawfarm.