YUSUFALLI ESMAIL NAGREE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 165A IPC for offering a bribe, affirming that the tape-recorded conversation between the appellant and the decoy witness was admissible as evidence under Sections 7 and 8 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Court ruled that the dialogue constituted res gestae and was corroborated by the tape recording, which was deemed reliable as there was no evidence of tampering. Furthermore, the Court clarified that the statements made by the appellant to the decoy were not considered statements to the police under Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, as he was unaware of police presence during the conversation.