A is in the business of construction. In the course of his business, he usually has to deal with a lot of government officials. In relation to the one of his construction projects, B, an official of the PWD Department asks for a bribe of Rs. 5,00,000/- from A for clearing a file. A is very irritated at his behavior. He refuses to pay any kind of bribe. Subsequent to this, B repeatedly calls A and threatens him that A’s project will never receive clearance. A after being constantly harassed gets in touch with C who is the Assistant Commissioner of the Anti-Corruption Branch. After due consultation, they decide to gather evidence against B by taping the telephonic conversation between A and B. On July 01, 2013 in the presence of C, A calls up B with the recording device attached to his phone. B’s demand for bribe is recorded and pursuant to that, charges are initiated against him in the court. During the course of the trial, B contends that the telephonic conversation cannot be produced in evidence as it was procured illegally in violation of Section 25 of the Indian Telegraph Act which is as follows:-

Intentionally damaging or tampering with telegraphs-If any person, intending-

i) to prevent or obstruct the transmission or delivery of any message, or

ii) to intercept or to acquaint himself with the contents of any message, or

iii) to commit mischief, damages, removes, tampers with or touches any battery, machinery, telegraph line, post or other thing whatever, being part of or used in or about any telegraph or in the working thereof,

shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine or with both.

Decide if the recorded telephonic conversation is admissible in evidence or not.     (15 Marks)