Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.27 seconds)The Customs Act, 1962
Gold (Control) Act, 1968
Section 165 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Rajeswar Prosad Misra vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 6 May, 1965
It has been held by this Court in Rajeswar Prasad Mora
v. State of West Bengal & Anr.,[1966] 1 SCR 178 while
dealing with the ample power and jurisdiction of the court
in taking additional evidence as follows:
Ratilal Bhanji Mithani vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 4 February, 1971
The above view has been reiterated in R.B. Mithani v.
Maharashtra, AIR 1971 S.C. 1630.
Rengaswami Naicker vs Muruga Naicken on 30 July, 1952
692; Rengaswami Naicker v. Muruga Naicker,
AIR 1954 Mad.
Mir Mohd. Omar & Ors vs State Of West Bengal on 8 August, 1989
A decision of this Court in Mir Mohd. Omar and Other
v. State of West Bengal, [1989] 4 SCC 436 was relied upon to
show that after the examination of the accused under Section
313 of the new Code (corresponding to Section 342 of the old
Code) the prosecution should not move the Trial Judge for
recalling a witness already examined, but the observation
made in that decision has no application to the present case
because in that case the said observation was made in a
different context by this court while examining the plea of
the prosecution in making corrections of the evidence
already recorded under Section 272 of the Code and that
decision does not deal with the ambit of Section 540 of the
Code.