Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 61 (0.34 seconds)The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 80 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Kushal Rao vs The State Of Bombay on 25 September, 1957
20.1 There is no requirement of law that a
dying declaration must necessarily be made to a
Magistrate. What is essentially required is
that the person who records a dying declaration
must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit
state of mind. A dying declaration which has
been recorded by a competent Magistrate in the
proper manner, i.e. to say, in the form of
questions and answers, and as far as practicable,
in the words of the maker of the declaration,
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:57:14 :::
62 CR.A.670/2009
stands on a much higher footing than a dying
declaration which depends on oral testimony which
may suffer from all infirmities of human memory
and human character. ( Khushal Rao Vs. State of
Bombay (AIR 1958 SC 22).
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Kusa & Ors vs State Of Orissa on 17 January, 1980
130), Kusa Vs. State of Orissa ( (1980) 2 SCC
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:57:14 :::
61 CR.A.670/2009
207, Misala Ramkrishnan Vs. State of A.P. (1994 4
SCC 182), Govardhan Raoji Ghaire Vs. State of
Maharashtra ( (1993) (Suppl.)
Tehal Singh And Ors. vs State Of Punjab on 27 October, 1978
State or Punjab that simply because the very words
uttered by the injured are not reproduced, it is no
reason to reject the dying declaration if the Court is
otherwise satisfied that the dying declaration, as
recorded, correctly reproduces what was stated by the
injured. The Supreme Court in Tehal Singh V. State of
Punjab has held that the substance of the dying
declaration written in the words of the writer attaches
no infirmity.