Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.32 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Rasheed Beg And Ors. vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 November, 1973
In the case of Rasheed Beg v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (supra) Their Lordships of Hon'ble the Supreme Court held :
Munnu Raja & Anr vs The Stae Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 November, 1975
47. Having gone through the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munna Raja (supra), we are of the view that there cannot be any quarrel with the oppositions laid down but we fail to see how this judgment is of any help to the accused appellant in this case.
Section 201 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Ratan Lal And Ors. vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 November, 2001
In the case of Ratan Lal & Others v. State of Rajasthan (supra), the prosecution failed to prove the dying declaration of deceased was true and free from all doubt. Executing Magistrate had gone to hospital alone and I was not associated by any doctor while recording the statement of the deceased. Persons who put their signature on dying declaration as witnesses, were not produced in trial. So, in the peculiar facts of that case, benefit was given to the accused appellants therein.
Jai Karan vs State Of (N.C.T. Delhi) on 27 September, 1999
55. Reference here may have to the decision in the case of Jai Karan v. State of (N.C.T. Delhi), JT 1999 (7) SC 514, wherein it has been held.
Chandra Narain Yadav vs Shibjee Yadav And Ors. on 21 April, 1999
56. Reference may have to another decision of the Apex Court in Chandra Narain Yadav v. Shibjee Yadav and Ors., JT 1999 (9) SC 365, wherein Their Lordships held :
Section 374 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Balak Ram Etc vs The State Of U.P on 16 August, 1974
In support of this submission, reliance was placed on a judgment of this Court in Balak Ram v. State of UP, AIR 1974 SC 2165 at page 2175. The error of this argument consists in the assumption that the dying declaration was made to an investigating officer. The statement, Ex. P. 14, was made by Bahadur Singh at the police station by way of a First Information Report. It is after the information was recorded and indeed because of it, that the investigation commenced and therefore it is wrong to say that the statement was made to an investigating officer. The Station House Officer who recorded the statement did not possess the capacity of an investigating officer at the time when he recorded the statement. The judgment on which the Counsel relies has therefore no application.