Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.43 seconds)
Documents citing The Public Prosecutor vs N. Venkatarama Naidu on 18 February, 1943

Daau Ram vs State on 27 May, 2019

19. Again in Public Prosecutor v. Venkatarama Naidu, AIR 1943 Mad 542, the question arose how the notes of a speech taken by a police officer be admitted in evidence. It was held that it was not (Downloaded on 28/06/2019 at 06:34:55 AM) (9 of 13) [CRLA-87/2019] necessary that the officer should be made to testify orally after referring to those notes. The police officer should describe his attendance, the making of the relevant speech and give a description of its nature so as to identify his presence there and his attention to what was going on, and that after that it was quite enough it he said "I wrote down that speech and this is what I took down," and if the prosecution had done that, they would be considered to have proved the words.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jeeva vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 October, 2020

19. Again in Public Prosecutor v. Venkatarama Naidu, AIR 1943 Mad 542, the question arose how the notes of a speech taken by a police officer be admitted in evidence. It was held that it was not necessary that the officer should be (Downloaded on 13/10/2020 at 08:38:45 PM) (11 of 15) [CRLAD-296/2019] made to testify orally after referring to those notes. The police officer should describe his attendance, the making of the relevant speech and give a description of its nature so as to identify his presence there and his attention to what was going on, and that after that it was quite enough it he said "I wrote down that speech and this is what I took down," and if the prosecution had done that, they would be considered to have proved the words.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - S Mehta - Full Document

Dharma vs The State on 27 July, 1965

19. Again in Public Prosecutor v. Venkatarama Naidu, AIR 1943 Mad 542, the question arose how the notes of a speech taken by a police officer be admitted in evidence. It was held that it was not necessary that the officer should be made to testify orally after referring to those notes. The police officer should describe his attendance, the making of the relevant speech and give a description of its nature so as to identify his presence there and his attention to what was going on, and that after that it was quite enough it he said "I wrote down that speech and this is what I took down," and if the prosecution had done that, they would be considered to have proved the words.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 15 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1