Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (1.57 seconds)
Documents citing Hira H. Advani Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 13 August, 1969

Ram Dayal vs Central Narcotic Bureau on 3 September, 1992

24. Our Supreme Court has, we reiterate, categorically rejected the American "exclusionary rule" and indeed also the principle embodied in the Common Law maxim, nemo tenetur seipsum accusare in the case of Hira H. Advani v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1971 SC 44 holding the Evidence Act to be the complete Code, excluding operation of any non-statutory rule of doctrine.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 59 - Cited by 14 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Asstt. Collector Of Customs vs Harbans Lal Sharaf on 8 February, 1980

In Hira H. Advani v. State of Maharashtra , it was observed that Sea Customs Authorities are merely constituted administrative machinery for the purpose of adjudging confiscation, increased rate of duty and penalty prescribed in the Sea Customs Act and that statement under Section 171-A (4) did not stand at par with confession so that it had to be taken as a whole or rejected as a whole.
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Babu Lal And Another vs The State And Others on 26 May, 1981

But it appears that the law has undergone a change in Nishi Kant Jha v. State of Bihar, ; Hira H. Advani v. State of Maharashtra, and Bhagwan Singh Rana v. State of Haryana, which have made it permissible to believe one part of the confessional statement and disbelieve another if the whole of the confession is tendered in evidence. It is, therefore, too late in the day to urge that the confessional statement cannot be believed in part and disbelieved in part.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Vidarbha Nagarpalika Parishad And Ors. ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Etc. on 22 July, 1985

In H. H. Advani v. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court held that the meaning to be attached to the word "deemed " must depend upon the context in which it is used and cited the observations made in St. Aubyn v. Attorney-General (1951)2 All ER 473 at p. 498) as under "The word "deemed" is used a great deal in modern legislation. Sometimes it is used to impose for the purpose of a statute an artificial construction for a word or phrase that would not otherwise prevail. Sometimes it is used to put beyond doubt a particular construction that might otherwise be uncertain. Sometimes it is used to give a comprehensive description that includes what is obvious, what is uncertain and what is, in the ordinary sense, impossible."
Bombay High Court Cites 42 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Gururaj Gurunath Govind Rao Mutalik ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 1994

All ER 473, referred to in Hira H. Advani v. State of Maharashtra, , the expression 'deemed' which is normally used to create a statutory fiction may also be used to put beyond doubt a meaning which may otherwise be uncertain or give an expression a comprehensive description that it includes what is obvious, what is uncertain and what is, in the ordinary sense, impossible. In our view, Section 57 provides for the meaning of expression 'final'. We have referred to certain decisions which take the view that final means as without recourse to appeal but does not exclude revision and that is the meaning attributed to the expression 'final' in Section 57 of the Land Revenue Act.
Karnataka High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 14 - S B Majmudar - Full Document
1   2 3 Next