Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 100 (3.65 seconds)
Documents citing Ram Jas vs State Of U.P on 11 September, 1970

Shiva Nath Prasad vs State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 1 July, 2005

92. Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Ram Jas v. State of U.P., and R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab (supra) Mr. Shanti Bhusan submitted that the abovestated facts and circumstances would make it clear that neither the complainant nor the attesting witnesses of the Will suffered any loss or damage or harm either in body, or mind, or reputation or property and they had nothing to show that the complainant or the said witnesses delivered any property to the petitioner and other accused persons by any inducement or deceive, The complainant and his witness M.P. Sharma were not present when any misrepresentation might have been made to PDB by Mr. Lodha, there is no legal evidence in support of this allegation in the complaint. Even if these witnesses referred to some statement having been made by late PDB to them, such evidence would be hearsay which would not be admissible as being a statement of a deceased person. Statement of a deceased is admissible only in the circumstances set out in Section 32 of the Evidence Act. The 8 circumstances set out in Section 32 relating to admissibility of statement of deceased are not at all applicable in this case and the so called statement of late PDB does not fall in any of the 8 clauses mentioned above. Even if any evidence is adduced about the statement of PDB, it would not constitute any legal evidence under the Evidence Act.
Calcutta High Court Cites 109 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Faisal vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 29 March, 2006

10. Further, it is true that, in the decision reported in Ram Jas v. State of U.P. AIR 1974 (S.C.) 1811, it has been observed that, merely giving a false address or wrong identification to attest the affidavit by the person before the oath commissioner, it cannot be said that he had committed the offence punishable under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code. Though Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code is not as such applicable, giving a false address, so as to get themselves exonerated from the case and divert the investigation on the part of the accused will amount to an offence and it is for the court to consider the allegations and frame appropriate charge in such circumstances. Merely because a wrong provision was quoted by the police officer is not a ground to quash the proceedings, if the Crl.M.C. No.1087 of 2014 10 allegations in the final report and the materials collected will disclose some other offence, then there is no bar for the court to frame charge under the correct provisions and proceed against the accused. Since the present petitioner did not appear, the question as to whether he had committed any offence by giving false address etc. are matter to be considered after evidence. So under the circumstances, the dictum laid down in the above decision is not applicable to the facts of this case.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next