Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (1.98 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Ali Mahomed Adamalli vs Emperor on 3 July, 1945
See also Public Prosecutor v. Venkatachalamaiah, 1956 Andhra WR 915: (AIR 1957 Andh-Pra 286); In re, Johnson, 1956 Andhra WR 676: (AIR 1957 Andh-Pra 829); State v. Raoji Kaloji Kandan, ; Koli Ganda Malu v. The State, (S) AIR 1956 Sau 25: 1956 Cr LJ 775; Romesh Chandra v. Emperor, ILR 41 Cal 350: (AIR 1914 Cal 456); Mahomed Bashir v. Emperor, 33 Cri LJ 943: (AIR 1932 All 185; Barindra Kumar Ghose v. Emperor, ILR 37 Cal 467 at p. 500; Bonomalli Bhattacharjee v. Emperor, AIR 1940 Cal 85; Abdul Hafiz Khan v, Emperor, AIR 1926 All 188; Dinkar Nhanu v. Emperor, AIR 1930 Bom 169; AIR 1951 Nag 237, Point 1 fails.
The Secretary Of State For India In ... vs Maharajah Sir Venkata Swetha ... on 27 October, 1915
12. It has been repeatedly laid down that the accent is on the word "respectable" and not on the word "locality", Ghandalal Kalidas v. Emperor, AIR 1934 Sind 159 : 36 Cr LJ 704; Gopimahto v. Emperor, AIR 1932 Pat 66; State v. Rang Rao Bala, ; Ram Rao Ekoba v. The Crown, AIR 1951 Nag 237; Simon Kaitan Fernandez v. State, ; Emperor v. Darshan Singh, AIR 1941 Lah 297, and that even if witnesses from a different locality are examined, it will not make the search invalid or make the evidence of the search witnesses inadmissible.
The Indian Post Office Act, 1898
Section 2 in The Indian Post Office Act, 1898 [Entire Act]
Willie (William) Slaney vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 October, 1955
To sum up after Slaney's Case, the present swing is away from technicality and a greater endeavour is made in regard to the substance rather than the shadow and to administer justice fairly and impartially as it should he administered viz., fair to the accused, fair to the State and fair to the vast mass of the people for whose protection penal laws are made and administered.
Simon Kaitan Fernandez vs State on 28 June, 1951
12. It has been repeatedly laid down that the accent is on the word "respectable" and not on the word "locality", Ghandalal Kalidas v. Emperor, AIR 1934 Sind 159 : 36 Cr LJ 704; Gopimahto v. Emperor, AIR 1932 Pat 66; State v. Rang Rao Bala, ; Ram Rao Ekoba v. The Crown, AIR 1951 Nag 237; Simon Kaitan Fernandez v. State, ; Emperor v. Darshan Singh, AIR 1941 Lah 297, and that even if witnesses from a different locality are examined, it will not make the search invalid or make the evidence of the search witnesses inadmissible.
Emperor vs Bachcha on 18 April, 1934
The word locality is not restricted to mean the same quarter. If owing to circumstances like a thinly populated locality or where on account of the fact that the quarter is occupied by the accused's kinsmen and caste-men or where on account of the terror and influence he inspires impartial men who are above being tampered with later would not be forthcoming, there is nothing wrong in the police taking the assistance of respectable men living at a distance as a search witness : Mahadev Prasad Vishnu v. Emperor, AIR 1934 Oudh 90; Emperor v. Bachcha, AIR 1934 All 873; AIR 1941 Lah 297. It has also been laid down in several decisions, and for which no citation is required, that the fact that P. W. 7 has assisted the Police in another search on another occasion, is not sufficient to deprive him of his respectability.
Abdul Hafiz Khan vs Emperor on 26 August, 1925
See also Public Prosecutor v. Venkatachalamaiah, 1956 Andhra WR 915: (AIR 1957 Andh-Pra 286); In re, Johnson, 1956 Andhra WR 676: (AIR 1957 Andh-Pra 829); State v. Raoji Kaloji Kandan, ; Koli Ganda Malu v. The State, (S) AIR 1956 Sau 25: 1956 Cr LJ 775; Romesh Chandra v. Emperor, ILR 41 Cal 350: (AIR 1914 Cal 456); Mahomed Bashir v. Emperor, 33 Cri LJ 943: (AIR 1932 All 185; Barindra Kumar Ghose v. Emperor, ILR 37 Cal 467 at p. 500; Bonomalli Bhattacharjee v. Emperor, AIR 1940 Cal 85; Abdul Hafiz Khan v, Emperor, AIR 1926 All 188; Dinkar Nhanu v. Emperor, AIR 1930 Bom 169; AIR 1951 Nag 237, Point 1 fails.