Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 30 (0.31 seconds)

Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 July, 1984

The test laid down by Lord Atkin has been quoted in the judgment of Fazal Ali, J. in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (supra) and His Lordship has held that Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act is an exception to the rule of hearsay evidence and in view of the peculiar conditions in the Indian Society has widen the sphere to avoid injustice. His Lordship has held that where the main evidence consists of statements and letters written by the deceased which are directly connected with or related to her death and which reveal a tell-tale story, the said statements would clearly fall within the four corners of Section 32 and, therefore, admissible and the distance of time alone in such cases would not make the statements irrelevant.
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3286 - Full Document

Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal on 14 July, 2020

17.1 It is also observed in the above Judgment that, Section 65-B of the Evidence Act does not speak of the stage at which the certifcate must be furnished to the Court. It is further observed that, the Judgment in Anvar P. V. Vs. P. K. Basheer and Ors.; [2014] 10 SCC 473, as clarifed in the Judgment [Arjun Panditrao Khotkar Vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal and Ors. (Supra)] was the law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court on Section 65-B of the Evidence Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 91 - Cited by 462 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1   2 3 Next