Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (1.10 seconds)Section 75 in The Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 [Entire Act]
Section 31 in The Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 [Entire Act]
Section 391 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 33 in The Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 [Entire Act]
Section 372 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 378 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Ashok Tshering Bhutia vs State Of Sikkim on 25 February, 2011
Sub-section (1) of Section 391 Cr.P.C. provides that
appellate Court may allow additional evidence if it thinks it to be
necessary after recording reasons and such evidence shall be taken
in the manner as provided under Chapter-XXIII
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Tshering
Bhutia Vs. State of Sikkim reported in (2011) 4 SCC 402 has
held that additional evidence at the appellate stage is permissible,
in case of a failure of justice. However, such power must be
exercised sparingly and only in exceptional suitable cases where the
court is satisfied that directing additional evidence would serve the
interests of justice. It would depend upon the facts and
circumstances of an individual case as to whether such permission
should be granted having due regard to the concepts of fair play,
justice and the well-being of society. Such an application for taking
additional evidence must be decided objectively, just to cure the
irregularity. The primary object of the provisions of Section 391
Cr.P.C. is the prevention of a guilty man's escape through some
careless or ignorant action on part of the prosecution before the
court or for vindication of an innocent person wrongfully accused,
where the court omitted to record the circumstances essential to
(16 of 28)
[CRLA-193/2014]
elucidation of truth. Generally, it should be invoked when formal
proof for the prosecution is necessary.