Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.84 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Tara Singh vs The State on 1 June, 1951
Much as we may be tempted to give a wide interpretation to Section 340, Cr. P.C. in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution, we cannot do so in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Janardhan Reddy v. State of Hyderabad and Tara Singh v. State .
A.K. Gopalan vs The State Of Madras.Union Of India: ... on 19 May, 1950
It was decided in the case of A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, . that the procedure established by law meant procedure prescribed by the law of the State i. e., enacted law. It did not include the rules of natural justice. Patanjali Sastri J. while he agreed that the procedure established by law did not include the rules of natural justice was inclined to take the view that 'procedure established by law did not mean procedure prescribed by Parliament or the Legislature of the State but meant "the ordinary and well established Criminal Procedure, that is to say, those settled usages in normal modes of proceeding sanctioned by the Criminal Procedure Code which is the general law of Criminal Procedure in the Country." The distinction made by Patanjali Sastri J. is not of much importance in the present case since we are concerned here only with the procedure prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure and not that prescribed by any other statute. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not prescribe that it shall be the duty of the Court to appoint a counsel to defend the accused in a case where the accused is not defended by a counsel. Section 340 Cr. P.C. provides that any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court or against whom proceedings are instituted under the Code in any such Court, may of right be defended by a pleader.
Section 165 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 375 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 45 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Janardan Reddy And Others vs The State Of Hyderabad And ... on 16 March, 1951
Much as we may be tempted to give a wide interpretation to Section 340, Cr. P.C. in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution, we cannot do so in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Janardhan Reddy v. State of Hyderabad and Tara Singh v. State .
1