Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.28 seconds)
Documents citing Shashikant Jha & Ors vs State Of Bihar on 27 June, 2012

Jaffar Ali And Anr vs State Of Assam And Anr on 28 February, 2020

In the case of Nishikant Jha Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 1969 SC 422, the Apex Court held that when a confessional statement contains both inculpatory and exculpatory statements and the exculpatory statement is found to be untrue or inherently improbable, the court may accept the inculpatory statement, which is found to be true and consistent with other evidence and pointed to the guilt of the appellants, and reject the exculpatory part of the statement which is found to be false. In the instant case, in our considered opinion, though, the confession of the appellant Zaffar contained both exculpatory and inculpatory statement, the exculpatory statement to the extent, by which, the appellant sought to establish, that Sultan was not involved, is not at all believable in view of the clear evidence of PW-4, PW-5, PW-7, PW- 8, PW-12 & PW-14 as well medical evidence and as such, this part of the statement has to be rejected, inasmuch as, there is no difficulty in distinguishing between the inculpatory and exculpatory version contained in the confession and evidently, the exculpatory part is not believable.
Gauhati High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - S H Swu - Full Document

Aswini Kalita vs State Of Assam on 26 April, 2022

50. As noticed above, in his statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C, accused Aswini had disclosed all other relevant facts but had craftily avoided admitting in specific terms that he had killed the deceased. In other words the accused Aswini Kalita in his statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C has substantially admitted all the relevant facts, which, when viewed in the light of the evidence available on record, would constitute an offence and support the prosecution story. Therefore, we are unable to agree with the submission of Mr. Agarwal that the confessional statement of accused Aswin Kalita contains only exculpatory statements. Even if it is held that the confession of accused Aswini Kalita contains both exculpatory and inculpatory statements, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Nishikant Jha (Supra) and Keshoram Bora (Supra), we find force in the submission of the learned APP that it would be permissible for the Court to segregate the exculpatory part from the confessional statement and act only on the other part of the statement.
Gauhati High Court Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - S Shyam - Full Document

State vs . Som Raj on 12 September, 2014

" the statement made in his defence by the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C can certainly be taken aid of to lend credence to the evidence led by the prosecution, but only a part of such statement under Section of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be made the sole basis of his conviction. The law on the subject is almost settled that the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C of the accused can either be rely in whole or in part. It may also be possible to rely on the inculpatory part of his statement if the exculpatory part in found to be false on the basis of the evidence led by the FIR No. 378/2001 12 Of 18 prosecution See Nishikant Jha v. State of Bihar, AIR (1969) SC 422."
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1