New Delhi: The National Forensic Science University (NFSU), Gandhinagar, informed the Supreme Court of India on November 3 that the audio recordings said to be implicating former Manipur chief minister N. Biren Singh in the 2023 ethnic violence were scientifically not fit for voice comparison, LiveLaw reported November 3. The tapes, according to NFSU, were found to be "tampered" and could therefore not be used to verify the voice of the speaker.

This revelation came in response to a petition filed by the Kuki Organisation for Human Rights (KOHUR) Trust, which has sought a court-monitored investigation into the alleged involvement of political figures in the violence that ravaged the state in 2023.

In September 2024, in public interest, The Wire had published those tapes after they were accepted by the judicial commission on the Manipur violence set up by the Ministry of Home Affairs.

[Read the five-part ‘Manipur Tapes’ reports of The Wire: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.]

According to the final NFSU report, dated October 10, 2025 and cited by Live Law, "four exhibits" submitted for analysis "showed signs of modification and tampering", the Hindu newspaper also reported on Monday. As a result, the laboratory concluded that it could not offer any opinion on whether the voice in the disputed audio clips matched the control voice sample attributed to the former chief minister.

The premier forensic laboratory’s findings stand in contrast to an earlier report submitted by a private forensic agency, Truth Labs, which had claimed with 93% probability that one of the recordings matched the control sample of Biren Singh’s voice. This was mentioned by advocate Prashant Bhushan in court, on behalf of the petitioners.

"We will give you the report so you can respond to it," Justice Sanjay Kumar, one of the members of the two-judge bench hearing the issue said. The bench, which includes Justice Alok Aradhe, then ordered that the NFSL's final case report be made available to the counsel for the parties by the Registrar.

When Bhushan pointed out that Truth Labs had a credible record, Justice Kumar said, "We don't know, because this [the NFSL] is supposed to be the premier forensic lab."

Bhushan replied, "Yes, but it is a government lab. And your Lordships know that today when the government…"

"More than a year and half ago it was sent to the government and yet it remains uninvestigated by the government despite the very very damaging conversations and that," Bhushan added, LiveLaw reported.

In August, the apex court had asked the Union government why the forensic report to authenticate the audio tape had not been submitted even after three months have passed since the court had asked for it.

Then, on August 19, a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma said it had not asked the CFSL to authenticate the audio clips but had directed it only to test two voice samples – one in the tapes and one authenticated sample of Singh’s voice submitted by the petitioner, and give a report if they matched.

An India Today NE report had previously underlined that the bench went on to tell additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, “We don’t need the authenticity of the video to be established. The entire exercise seems to be misdirected. Only wishy-washy answers are being given. The CFSL is under the impression that we want to know if the video is authentic or not.”

The counsel for Manipur state said he was unable to follow the conversation in the audio clip, to which Bhushan responded that the forensic experts have access to better tools and equipment to enhance clarity.

The case is being heard by the Supreme Court, which has directed that NFSU’s report be provided to the concerned parties in a sealed cover. The matter has been listed for the next hearing on December 8.

During the proceedings on November 3, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, argued that the situation in Manipur "is now peaceful" and cautioned against steps that would "meddle" with that.

The petitioners, on the other hand, said there was a need for judicial oversight, arguing that state authorities could not impartially investigate allegations that touch the highest levels of the political establishment.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.