Indiana: Call and Conversation Recording Consent Requirements
The short answer
Indiana is a one-party-consent state. Its interception statute only reaches a recording made by 'a person other than a sender or receiver' of the communication and 'without the consent of the sender or receiver' (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176), so if you are a party to a call—or one party consents—recording it is not an unlawful interception. The statute covers communications carried by wire, radio, or similar systems (telephone, cellular, electronic); a purely in-person conversation is outside it. Recording as an outsider without any party's consent is a Level 5 felony, and a victim can sue for damages under Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-4.
Ask Ezel about your situation
This is the general rule in Indiana. Ezel applies current Indiana law to your specific facts and answers with citations to the statutes.
| Governing law and covered recording | Indiana's wiretap law is Ind. Code Article 35-33.5 (Interception of Telephonic or Telegraphic Communications), with defined terms in Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2. 'Interception' is the intentional recording or acquisition of the contents of an electronic communication 'by a person other than a sender or receiver of that communication, without the consent of the sender or receiver' (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). Indiana has no separate statute requiring consent to record a purely in-person conversation. |
|---|---|
| Whose consent a participant needs | One party. Because an 'interception' happens only when the recorder is not a party and lacks any party's consent (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176), a participant recording a call is never an unlawful interception, and a nonparticipant is covered only if the person records without the consent of a sender or receiver. So being a party—or having one party's consent—makes the recording lawful. |
| Privacy, confidentiality, or secrecy trigger | There is no expectation-of-privacy or 'confidential communication' qualifier. What matters is party status and consent: the statute reaches only a recording by someone who is not a sender or receiver and who lacks a party's consent (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). Readily accessible, unencrypted radio transmissions are expressly outside the definition of interception. |
| Telephone, in-person, and electronic coverage | The statute covers an 'electronic communication'—signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, oral communication, data, or intelligence transmitted in whole or part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-110). That reaches telephone, cellular, and internet audio. A face-to-face conversation not transmitted by such a system is not an 'electronic communication,' so Indiana's interception statute does not govern purely in-person recording at all. |
| How consent or notice is given | One party's consent is enough, and a participant supplies it by being a party. The statute frames the rule as recording 'without the consent of the sender or receiver' (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176); it prescribes no written form, spoken script, warning tone, or notice. No particular method of giving or documenting consent is required. |
| Major participant-facing exceptions | Because a participant recording is not an 'interception,' no special participant exception is needed and none keyed to gathering evidence of a crime exists. Readily accessible unencrypted radio transmissions are excluded from the definition (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). Communication-service providers and those assisting them have immunity for authorized assistance (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-6). In-person conversations fall outside the statute entirely. |
| Criminal classification and penalty | A person who knowingly or intentionally intercepts a communication in violation of the article commits unlawful interception, a Level 5 felony (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-5(b)). A Level 5 felony carries a fixed term of one to six years, with a three-year advisory sentence, and a fine of up to $10,000 (Ind. Code § 35-50-2-6(b)). Only a nonparty interception without consent triggers this; a lawful participant recording is not an offense. |
| Civil remedy and evidence effect | A person whose communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of the article may recover the greatest of actual damages, liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation, or $1,000, plus court costs, punitive damages when appropriate, and reasonable attorney's fees (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-4); good-faith reliance on a warrant is a complete defense and the action has a two-year limit. The article's evidence rule (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-1) governs court use of warrant-authorized interceptions; it does not create a separate suppression remedy for a private unlawful recording, and a lawful participant recording is admissible under ordinary rules. |
| Interstate and federal boundary | Indiana's one-party rule matches federal law, which lets a participant, or a person with one party's prior consent, record unless the purpose is criminal or tortious (18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d)). A call that reaches an all-party-consent state can trigger that stricter law, so consent from everyone is the prudent baseline for an interstate call. This survey does not decide which state's law governs. |
Compare this rule across all 50 states + DC →
Requirements one by one
Governing law and covered recording
Indiana's recording rules come from its wiretap law, Ind. Code Article 35-33.5 (Interception of Telephonic or Telegraphic Communications), whose defined terms sit in Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2. The key definition is "interception": the intentional recording or acquisition of the contents of an electronic communication "by a person other than a sender or receiver of that communication, without the consent of the sender or receiver" (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). Everything turns on that phrase.
Whose consent a participant needs
Indiana requires only one party's consent. An unlawful "interception" happens only when the person recording is not a sender or receiver of the communication and acts without any party's consent. Because you are a sender or receiver of any call you take part in, recording your own conversation is not an interception at all—no one else's permission is needed. A nonparticipant is covered only if they record without the consent of a sender or receiver, so one party's consent is enough to make even a third party's recording lawful.
Privacy, confidentiality, or secrecy trigger
Indiana's statute has no expectation-of-privacy or "confidential communication" element. Whether a recording is lawful depends on party status and consent, not on how private the setting was (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). The one carve-out built into the definition is for readily accessible, unencrypted radio transmissions, which are not "interceptions" regardless of consent.
Telephone, in-person, and electronic coverage
The statute covers an "electronic communication," defined as signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, oral communication, data, or intelligence transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-110). That reaches telephone, cellular, and internet audio. But a purely face-to-face conversation is not transmitted by any such system, so it is not an "electronic communication"—which means Indiana's interception statute does not govern in-person recording. There is no Indiana statute imposing a separate consent rule for recording a conversation you are having in person.
How consent or notice is given
One party's consent is enough, and a participant provides it simply by being a party. The statute speaks of recording "without the consent of the sender or receiver" (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176) but does not prescribe any method—no written consent, spoken script, or warning tone is required, and there is no beep-tone rule.
Major participant-facing exceptions
Because a participant's recording is not an "interception" in the first place, Indiana needs no special participant exception, and it has no exception keyed to gathering evidence of a crime. The definition itself excludes readily accessible, unencrypted radio transmissions (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). Communication-service providers and people who assist them under the article have immunity for authorized assistance (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-6). And in-person conversations sit outside the statute altogether.
Criminal classification and penalty
A person who knowingly or intentionally intercepts a communication in violation of the article commits unlawful interception, a Level 5 felony (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-5(b)). A Level 5 felony carries a fixed prison term of one to six years, with a three-year advisory sentence, and a fine of up to $10,000 (Ind. Code § 35-50-2-6(b)). This applies only to a nonparty who records without consent; a lawful participant recording is not a crime.
Civil remedy and evidence effect
Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-4 gives a person whose communication was unlawfully intercepted, disclosed, or used a civil action to recover the greatest of actual damages, liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation, or $1,000—plus court costs, punitive damages when the court finds them appropriate, and reasonable attorney's fees. Good-faith reliance on a warrant is a complete defense, and the suit must be filed within two years. On the evidence side, Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-1 controls how a warrant-authorized interception may be used in court; the article does not create a separate statutory suppression remedy for a private unlawful recording, and a lawful participant recording is admissible under ordinary rules of evidence.
Interstate and federal boundary
Indiana's one-party rule lines up with federal law, which lets a participant—or a person with one party's prior consent—record unless the purpose is criminal or tortious (18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d)). Neither rule decides which state's law governs an interstate call, and several states require every party's consent. When a call may reach one of those states, getting consent from everyone is the safe course.
What trips people up
"Interception" is defined around outsiders. Indiana does not ban participant recording; it bans recording by someone who is not a party and has no party's consent (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176). If you are on the call, or one party said yes, you are outside the offense.
The statute is about transmitted communications, not in-person talk. Because it reaches only communications carried by wire, radio, or similar systems (Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-110), a face-to-face conversation recorded on a device is not covered. That is a different situation from a phone call, which is covered.
Unlawful recording is a felony with a real civil price. A nonparty who records without consent commits a Level 5 felony (Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-5(b)) and can be sued under Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-4 for at least $100 a day or $1,000, plus punitive damages and attorney's fees.
Common questions
Do I have to tell the other person I am recording our Indiana phone call? No. As a party to the call you may record it without anyone else's consent, because a participant's recording is not an unlawful interception.
Can I record an in-person conversation I am part of? Indiana's interception statute covers only communications transmitted by wire, radio, or similar systems, so it does not reach a purely face-to-face conversation. Other laws can still apply in specific settings, but this statute does not require consent to record in person.
What happens to someone who records a call they are not part of? Recording a communication as an outsider without a party's consent is a Level 5 felony and exposes the person to civil damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees under Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-4.
Statutes and sources
- Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176 — definition of "interception" (recording by a nonparty without a sender's or receiver's consent). https://iga.in.gov/ic/2025/Title_35/Article_31.5/Chapter_2.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-110 — definition of "electronic communication" (what the statute covers). https://iga.in.gov/ic/2025/Title_35/Article_31.5/Chapter_2.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-5 — unlawful interception classified as a Level 5 felony. https://iga.in.gov/ic/2025/Title_35/Article_33.5/Chapter_5.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Ind. Code § 35-50-2-6 — Level 5 felony sentence and fine. https://iga.in.gov/ic/2025/Title_35/Article_50/Chapter_2.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Ind. Code § 35-33.5-5-4 — civil action, damages, fees, defense, and limitations. https://iga.in.gov/ic/2025/Title_35/Article_33.5/Chapter_5.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) — federal private-participant consent rule. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section2511&num=0&edition=prelim (accessed 2026-07-20)
Source links
Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.
Get the answer for your situation
You just read how Indiana handles this in general. Ezel applies current Indiana law to your facts and answers your specific question, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.