Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 70 (0.94 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Rajasthan vs Wakteng on 7 June, 2007

Binod Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 26 February, 2026

In the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Wakteng (2007) 14 SCC 550, it was held that "while great solemnity and sanctity is attached to the words of a dying man because a person on the verge of death is not likely to tell lie or to concoct a case so as to implicate an innocent person but the court has to be careful to ensure that the statement was not the result of either tutoring, promoting or a product of imagination. It is, therefore, essential that court must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the statement, had clear capacity to observe and identify the assailant that he was making the statement without any influence or rancour. Once the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary and not suffering from any infirmity can be sole basis for conviction without any corroboration."
Jharkhand High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - R Mukhopadhyay - Full Document

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Suddu @ Surdarshan on 2 February, 2026

1), but the room inside the house where access of accused could not be established to be an easy one without there being any obstruction, we are of the opinion that when tested in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan vs. Wakteng (supra) , since prosecution has failed to establish that the dying declaration has remained uncorroborated and was not influenced by any external factor, there appears to be no rationale to show indulgence in the matter of acquittal in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahabir and Others Vs. State of Signature Not Verified Signed by: MOHD TABISH KHAN Signing time: 06-02-2026 11:30:29 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:9277 6 CRA-584-2016 Haryana, 2025 SCC Online SC 184 and accordingly, appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Kottala Shankar, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 20 June, 2018

Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the details of the occurrence, it cannot be rejected and in case there is merely a brief statement, it is more reliable for the reason that the shortness of the statement is itself a guarantee of its veracity. If the dying declaration suffers from some infirmity, it cannot alone form the basis of conviction. Where the prosecution version differs from the version given in the dying declaration, the said declaration cannot be acted upon. (Vide Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay2, Rasheed Beg v. State of M.P.3, K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor4, State of Maharashtra v. Krishnamurti Laxmipati Naidu , Uka Ram v. State of Rajasthan6, 5 Babulal v. State of M.P.7, Muthu Kutty v. State8, State of Rajasthan v. Wakteng9 and Sharda v. State of Rajasthan10).
Telangana High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Srinivasakumar vs State By The Assistant Commissioner Of ... on 18 July, 2019

Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the details of the occurrence, it cannot be rejected and in case there is merely a brief statement, it is more reliable for the reason that the shortness of the statement is itself a guarantee of its veracity. If the dying declaration suffers from some infirmity, it cannot alone form the basis of conviction. Where the prosecution version differs from the version given in the dying declaration, the said declaration cannot be acted upon. (Vide Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay [AIR 1958 SC 22 : 1958 Cri LJ 106] , Rasheed Beg v. State of M.P. [(1974) 4 SCC 264 : 1974 SCC (Cri) 426 : AIR 1974 SC 332] , K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor [(1976) 3 SCC 618 : 1976 SCC (Cri) 473 : AIR 1976 SC 1994] , State of Maharashtra v. Krishnamurti Laxmipati Naidu [1980 Supp SCC 455 : 1981 SCC (Cri) 364] , Uka Ram v. State of Rajasthan [(2001) 5 SCC 254 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 847] , Babulal v. State of M.P. [(2003) 12 SCC 490 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 620] , Muthu Kutty v. State [(2005) 9 SCC 113 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1202] , State of Rajasthan v. Wakteng [(2007) 14 SCC 550 : (2009) 3 SCC (Cri) 217] and Sharda v. State of Rajasthan [(2010) 2 SCC 85 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 980] .)
Madras High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - A D Chandira - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next