Bombay High Court grants bail to man whose voice samples were recorded in violation of Supreme Court guidelines

The Bombay High Court recently granted bail to a man after finding that the voice sample used to establish his involvement in the crime was not properly recorded. [Saurabh Raju @ Rajendra Dhage vs The State of Maharashtra].Justice Prithviraj Chavan observed that the accused was made to read from text that was inculpatory in nature in violation of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Sudhir Chaudhary & Ors. v State (NCT OF DELHI)"Ratio laid down in the decision of Sudhir Chaudhary and others (supra), is clearly applicable to the present set of facts, in the sense, the applicant herein, according to Mr. Nikam had been asked to read the text which is, essentially, inculpatory in nature for the purpose of drawing his voice sample," he stated. .The Court was hearing a bail application filed by a man who was arrested for committing offences punishable under Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) after an investigating officer found a video allegedly showing him burning an unidentified object from a phone seized by the officer in a separate criminal case.The prosecution claimed that the accused and others assaulted, murdered, and burnt a man who allegedly used to torment the applicant's mother. They alleged that the accused also videotaped the event..Assistant Public Prosecutor Amit A Palkar objected to the release of the accused on the ground that there are several criminal cases against the him and that if released, he could influence witnesses or abscond..On the other hand, advocate Aniket Nikam, appearing for the applicant, argued that except for some indecipherable conversation between the applicant and some of the other accused persons, there was no evidence against him. He argued that the deceased was a vagabond and an alcoholic and that the applicant had no motive to murder him.He also cited the observations in the order of a sessions court that had rejected his first bail application. The sessions judge had noted that the concerned video clip was very vague and although it showed something burning, it was not a person. He had, therefore, held that the clip was not sufficient to be used as evidence against the applicant. Nikam then invited the High Court's attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sudhir Chaudhary to highlight that the guidelines mentioned by the apex court were not followed while recording the voice sample of the applicant.The Supreme Court had directed that although an accused could be made to read words from the inculpatory texts, they could not be made to read sentences from them. .The Court observed that the law laid down in the judgment was applicable to the present case and noted that the applicant was made to read sentences from the inculpatory text.In view of these observations and the fact that trial might not conclude soon, the Court released the applicant on bail on executing a bond of ₹15,000. The accused was also ordered to attend the trial on each date..[Read Order]