Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (1.18 seconds)

A.P. Kuttan Panicker And Ors. vs State Of Kerala on 3 August, 1962

74. Shri Lakhawat also referred to the procedure of search under Section 103 Cr.P.C. and pointed out that in A.P. Kuttan Panicker v. State of Kerala 1963 (1) Cri.LJ 669 it has been held that the persons as motbirs should be from the neighbourhood as per the requirement of Section 103, Cr.P.C. We are unable to appreciate the relevancy in the present case because, firstly the present case is of recovery after information was given under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and after the accused, himself, led the police party and unearthed the chappals from the hidden place. Secondly, we are convicted that the witnesses produced for proving the recovery are not interested and there cannot be any rule of thumb that if the witnesses of that locality are not produced, the recovery made in pursuance of the information under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act should be disbelieved in the above judgment itself. In para 23, their Lordships of Kerala High Court held that unless the investigation is unfair, the testimony of the police officer making search can be acted upon.
Kerala High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 11 - Full Document
1   2 Next