Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (0.27 seconds)Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 209 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 32 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Smruti Tukaram Badade vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 January, 2022
(1) Shivaji s/o Tukaram Patdukhe v. State of Maharashtra,2004 1
MR (Cri) 3220, wherein, the coordinate Bench of this Court at the
Principal Seat observed that "the dying declaration at Exh.24, according to us, can
not be relied upon as the statement was never read over to deceased Durgabai and
there is no endorsement to that effect. When the declaration was not read over to
13 of 29
Criminal Apeal500-03
Durgabai and she had not admitted the contents thereof to be correct, according to
us, the dying declaration can not be made foundation for sustaining the
conviction."
Shaikah Bakshu And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 21 June, 2007
(2) Shaikh Bakshu and others v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2007) 11 SCC
269, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that Nayab Tahsildar has not
produced letter because it may be misplaced but nothing was prevented the
prosecution to produce copy of letter which was purported returned to the Nayab
Tahsildar and condition of deceased was very poor as stated by the medical officer
and the condition was deteriorated since 6.10 p.m. The learned trial court,
however held the dying declaration to be credible because medical was present
when the dying declaration was recorded. There was no mention about the dying
was read over and explained to the deceased. Therefore, the dying declaration was
unacceptable.
Jaishree Anant Khandekar vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 March, 2009
In support the said submissions, the learned APP placed reliance
on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jayshree Anant
Khandekar Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 11 SCC 647 , wherein, multiple
dying declarations were placed on record and the appellant in the said case
alleged to have poured kerosene on the person of deceased and set her on
fire, due to which the deceased had sustained 100% burn injury and
succumbed to the said injures after 15 days and the said dying declarations
were found in consistence and the declarant was conscious to make
statements. Under the circumstance, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that
the dying declaration has been corroborated with multiple dying declarations
given by the victim.