Hyderabad: The Telangana Anti Corruption Bureau is likely to depend on the audiotapes of AP Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu available with the AP State Legislative Assembly to match his voice with that in the mobile phone conversation with TRS MLA Stephenson in the cash-for-vote case.

According to legal experts, there is no “expressed and specific provision” for directing an accused to give voice samples for comparison, either in the Indian Evidence Act or under the Criminal Procedure Code.

In view of the above legal hurdle and also the Supreme Court ruling in the Ritesh Sinha versus State of UP case, the legal team at ACB has been exploring alternatives to obtain voice samples of Mr Naidu within the framework of the law.

Though the apex court had ruled in many cases that a compact disc containing recording of telephone conversation could be valid evidence according to Section 3 of the Evidence Act and Section 2(t) of the IT Act, it had differed with a trial court in ordering an investigation agency to collect voice samples of suspect\witnesses in the Ritesh Sinha case.

In the Ritesh Sinha case, Chief Judicial Magistrate of Saharanpur, UP had issued summons to the appellant to appear before the investigating officer and give his voice sample. Aggrieved by the order, the latter had moved the Supreme Court.

A senior lawyer associated with the legal team of the ACB on condition of anonymity revealed that the ACB has also been advised that the Legislative Assembly, which is a Constitutional and lawmaking body, cannot escape from providing the tapes when a law enforcing agency approaches it for help.

Even if the Assembly authorities refuse to provide audiotapes of Mr Naidu, the courts will certainly intervene in the matter, the lawyer opined.