Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 64 (1.98 seconds)
Documents citing Sonvir @ Somvir Thr. His Father Pappu ... vs State Nct Of Delhi on 10 December, 2014

Balakarupasamy vs State Represented By on 13 August, 2019

38. As held by this Court in Sonvir [Sonvir v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2018) 8 SCC 24 : (2018) 3 SCC (Cri) 486] , although Section 4 mentions that the police officer is competent to take measurements of the accused, but to dispel doubts as to its bona fides and to rule out the fabrication of evidence, it is eminently desirable that they were taken before or under the order of a Magistrate. However, the aforesaid observations cannot be held to mean that this Court observed that under Section 4, police officers are not entitled to take fingerprints until the order is taken from a Magistrate. If certain suspicious circumstances do arise from a particular case relating to lifting of fingerprints, in order to dispel or ward off such suspicious circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice to get orders from the Magistrate. Thus, there cannot be any hard-and-fast rule that in every case, there ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.38/72 Crl.A.(MD)Nos.451, 458, 479, 482, 498 of 2019 and 60 of 2020 should be a Magisterial order for lifting the fingerprints of the accused. Thus, it cannot be held that the fingerprint evidence was illegally obtained merely due to the absence of a Magisterial order authorising the same.
Madras High Court Cites 56 - Cited by 0 - J N Banu - Full Document

Balakarupasamy vs State Represented By on 13 August, 2019

38. As held by this Court in Sonvir [Sonvir v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2018) 8 SCC 24 : (2018) 3 SCC (Cri) 486] , although Section 4 mentions that the police officer is competent to take measurements of the accused, but to dispel doubts as to its bona fides and to rule out the fabrication of evidence, it is eminently desirable that they were taken before or under the order of a Magistrate. However, the aforesaid observations cannot be held to mean that this Court observed that under Section 4, police officers are not entitled to take fingerprints until the order is taken from a Magistrate. If certain suspicious circumstances do arise from a particular case relating to lifting of fingerprints, in order to dispel or ward off such suspicious circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice to get orders from the Magistrate. Thus, there cannot be any hard-and-fast rule that in every case, there ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.38/72 Crl.A.(MD)Nos.451, 458, 479, 482, 498 of 2019 and 60 of 2020 should be a Magisterial order for lifting the fingerprints of the accused. Thus, it cannot be held that the fingerprint evidence was illegally obtained merely due to the absence of a Magisterial order authorising the same.
Madras High Court Cites 56 - Cited by 0 - J N Banu - Full Document

Sakthivel vs The State

(emphasis supplied) A bare reading of these rules makes it amply clear that a police officer is permitted to take the photographs and measurements of the accused. Fingerprints can be taken under the directions of the police officer. As held by this Court in Sonvir (supra), although Section 4 mentions that the police officer is competent to take measurements of the accused, but to dispel doubts as to its bona fides and to rule out the fabrication of evidence, it is eminently desirable that they were taken before or under the order of a http://www.judis.nic.in 24 Magistrate. However, the aforesaid observations cannot be held to mean that this Court observed that under Section 4, police officers are not entitled to take fingerprints until the order is taken from a Magistrate. If certain suspicious circumstances do arise from a particular case relating to lifting of fingerprints, in order to dispel or ward off such suspicious circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice to get orders from the Magistrate. Thus there cannot be any hard and fast rule that in every case, there should be a magisterial order for lifting the fingerprints of the accused. Thus, it cannot be held that the fingerprint evidence was illegally obtained merely due to the absence of a magisterial order authorizing the same.”
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - M M Sundresh - Full Document

Chinnasamy vs .

486 [Sonvir V. State [NCT of Delhi]] and observed that ''Section 5 of the Act is not mandatory but, is directory and affirms the bona fides of the sample-taking and eliminates the possibility of fabrication of evidence.'' 197 Section 2[a] of the Identification of Prisoners' Act, 1920 [Central Act 33 of 1920] as amended by the Tamil Nadu Act 29 of 2010, defines ''measurements'' and it includes finger impressions and foot-print impressions.
Madras High Court Cites 111 - Cited by 0 - M Sathyanarayanan - Full Document

Muthukumar vs The State on 23 September, 2021

In Sonvir @ Somvir .vs. State(NCT of Delhi) reported in (2018)8 SCC 24, it has been held us “26.3. Alleged recovery of bloodstained shirt 26.3.1. As per the prosecution, a bloodstained shirt was recovered at the instance of Sonvir alias Somvir (Appellant- Accused 2) from his room in the house of Teja Chaudhary, at the time of his arrest. The bloodstained shirt was sent for analysis to the FSL. As per the FSL report (Ext. PW 33/A), the shirt allegedly recovered from Sonvir alias Somvir (Appellant-Accused 2) was found to be stained with human blood of “B” group, which was the same “blood group” as that of the deceased.
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - A D Chandira - Full Document

Arvind Kumar Verma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 June, 2022

In Sonvir alias Somvir (supra), it has been held by the Supreme Court relying upon its two earlier judgments in Prakash v. State of Karnataka15 and Debapriya (supra) that while deciding cases based on circumstantial evidence, mere matching of the blood group cannot lead to the conclusion of culpability of accused in absence of detailed serologist comparison; since millions of people would have the same blood group.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - S Agrawal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next