Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.25 seconds)
Documents citing Surendra Nath Das vs Emperor on 28 August, 1933

Harendra Prosad Bagchi vs Emperor on 22 April, 1940

4. Now the report in Surendra Das v. Emperor makes it plain that both the learned Judges were satisfied that the prosecutrix was an unreliable witness. Lort-Williams J. in his judgment, pointed this out at some length, and summed up by saying that, in view of these facts, it is clear that the utmost care must be taken by the Judge and jury before convicting. Henderson, J. said that in so far as the ease for the prosecutrix was that she had been forcibly raped, that case was contradicted by the medical evidence, and such portions of her story as are capable of being tested aliunde were found to be untrue also. The Judge in the Court below apparently did not advert to this aspect of the case and did not warn the jury as to the necessity for corroboration. The conclusion arrived. at by the Appellate Court was that from the facts stated, there was no proper direction in the case, on material points. The proposition of law laid down was that the jury should be warned that it is unsafe to convict on the uncorroborated testimony of a prosecutrix, but that they might still do so, if satisfied that she was telling the truth. The case is not, in my opinion, an authority for the head note, which states that where no such warning is given, the conviction must be set aside.
Calcutta High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Emperor vs Mahadeo Tatya on 3 December, 1941

He referred to the rule which requires corroboration, and pointed out, accurately enough, that it is not a statutory rule and that the verdict of a jury based on the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant would not be bad in law. But he certainly did not tell the jury that it was their duty not to act on the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant in view of the experience of the Courts that such evidence is not sufficiently reliable. That is the rule both in this country and in England. I do not know that I am prepared to go as far as the Calcutta High Court went in Surendra Nath Das v. Emperor1 in saying that the corroboration of the complainant's evidence in a rape case must be dealt with on the same footing as the corroboration of an accomplice's evidence. Subsequent conduct of the complainant in a rape case is a type of corroboration which has no application in the case of an accomplice.
Bombay High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 30 - Full Document

Sikandar Mian vs Emperor on 18 February, 1937

6. The conviction of this appellant depends upon the testimony of the girl alone in the sense that, if her evidence is not accepted as true, the conviction of the appellant could not be supported. There was corroboration; but it did not amount to anything which can be called conclusive. Indeed, apart from the direct evidence of the girl, the corroboration evidence would not even suggest that it was the appellant who committed this crime. It was therefore, inevitable that we should have raised before us again the question as to what is the duty of the judge in cases such as these; in particular we were asked to say that the judgment of Lort-Williams, J. in Surendra Nath Das v. Emperor , goes too far. Now, I do not think that there is any real difficulty in this matter at all. We had to consider it only the other day in the appeal by one Sarat Chandra Chakraburty and, if I may say so with respect, I agree with the statement which was made by my learned brother on that occasion. Now, I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by taking the individual words of Lort-Williams, J., and weighing them in a balance in view of the fact that his judgment was delivered extempore as far as I remember.
Calcutta High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Taser Pramanik And Ors. vs Emperor on 7 March, 1940

5. That is all the direction he gave to the jury upon the important question whether the girl's evidence ought to be accepted without corroboration, whether there was corroboration, what kind of corroboration it was and whether it was, as is necessary, corroboration with regard to the offence itself and which implicates the accused. Time after time this Court has drawn the attention of Judges to the necessity of a careful direction with regard to this point. I need only refer to the cases in Surendra Nath Das v. Emperor and Nur Ahmed Gazi v. Emperor .
Calcutta High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1