Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.26 seconds)Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Ravi Chander And Ors. vs State Of Punjab on 5 December, 1996
Reliance was placed on the earlier decision in the case of RAVI
39
CHANDER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB reported in (1998) 9 SCC 303,
wherein it had been observed that for not examining the doctor,
the dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate and
the dying declaration orally made need not be doubted. The
Magistrate being a disinterested witness and a responsible officer
and there being no circumstance or material to suspect that the
Magistrate had animus against the accused or was in any way
interested in fabricating a dying declaration, the question of
doubt on the declaration recorded by the Magistrate does not
arise.
Atbir vs Govt. Of N.C.T Of Delhi on 9 August, 2010
21. On this issue, it is relevant to notice the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ATBIR Vs
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI reported in (2010) 9 SCC 1,
with reference to para 22. The Hon'ble Supreme Court therein,
on analyzing all the judgments on the issue of dying declaration
have narrated at para 22 as follows:
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Raghunath Laxman Wani And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 6 August, 1971
20.(a) To this effect, learned Counsel places reliance on
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
LAXMAN Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA reported in (2002) 6 SCC
710 and submits that it is a judgment of the Constitutional
38
Bench of the Supreme Court consisting of 5 Judges. He places
reliance on para Nos.4 and 5 of the judgment.
Section 428 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Paparambaka Rosamma & Ors vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 13 September, 1999
It was of the view that the judgment of the Court in
Paparambaka's case is not correctly decided and is not in
conformity with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the
case of KOLI CHUNILAL SAVJI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT reported in
(1999) 9 SCC 562.