Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.28 seconds)Section 120B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
V. Sahadevan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 12 April, 2019
“30. Recently, in Sahadevan v. State of T.N., after referring
to the rulings in Sk. Yusuf v. State of W.B. and Pancho v.
State of Haryana, a two-Judge Bench has laid down that
the extra-judicial confession is a weak evidence by itself
and it has to be State of Haryana, a two-Judge Bench has
_________________
5
(2012) 6 SCC 403
6
(2012) 11 SCC 768
Criminal Appeal Nos.333-334 of 2017 Page 13 of 16
laid down that the extra-judicial confession is a weak
evidence by itself and it has to be examined by the court
with greater care and caution; that it should be made
voluntarily and should be truthful; that it should inspire
confidence; that an extra-judicial confession attains
greater credibility and evidentiary value if it is supported
by a chain of cogent circumstances and is further
corroborated by other prosecution evidence; that for an
extra-judicial confession to be the basis of conviction, it
should not suffer from any material discrepancies and
inherent improbabilities; and that such statement
essentially has to be proved like any other fact and in
accordance with law."
Anjan Kumar Sarma vs State Of Assam on 23 May, 2017
In the case of Bodh Raj Alias Bodha v/s State of Jammu and
Kashmir2, Rambraksh v/s State of Chhattisgarh 3 , Anjan Kumar
Sharma v/s State of Assam4 following principle of law, in this
regard, has been enunciated:-
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 July, 1984
13. This court in the case of Sharad Birdichand Sharda v/s State of
Maharashtra1 has enunciated the aforesaid principle as under:-
Pancho vs State Of Haryana on 20 October, 2011
“30. Recently, in Sahadevan v. State of T.N., after referring
to the rulings in Sk. Yusuf v. State of W.B. and Pancho v.
State of Haryana, a two-Judge Bench has laid down that
the extra-judicial confession is a weak evidence by itself
and it has to be State of Haryana, a two-Judge Bench has
_________________
5
(2012) 6 SCC 403
6
(2012) 11 SCC 768
Criminal Appeal Nos.333-334 of 2017 Page 13 of 16
laid down that the extra-judicial confession is a weak
evidence by itself and it has to be examined by the court
with greater care and caution; that it should be made
voluntarily and should be truthful; that it should inspire
confidence; that an extra-judicial confession attains
greater credibility and evidentiary value if it is supported
by a chain of cogent circumstances and is further
corroborated by other prosecution evidence; that for an
extra-judicial confession to be the basis of conviction, it
should not suffer from any material discrepancies and
inherent improbabilities; and that such statement
essentially has to be proved like any other fact and in
accordance with law."
Tota Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 1 April, 1987
In light of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the appeals and set
aside the conviction and sentences of the appellants in the
__________________________________________
7
Tota Singh v. State of Punjab (1987) 2 SCC 529
8
Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415
Criminal Appeal Nos.333-334 of 2017 Page 15 of 16
charge-sheet arising from FIR No. 55/2001. The appellants are
accordingly directed to be released from custody, unless they are
required to be detained in any other case in accordance with law.
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Sk. Yusuf vs State Of West Bengal on 14 June, 2011
“30. Recently, in Sahadevan v. State of T.N., after referring
to the rulings in Sk. Yusuf v. State of W.B. and Pancho v.
State of Haryana, a two-Judge Bench has laid down that
the extra-judicial confession is a weak evidence by itself
and it has to be State of Haryana, a two-Judge Bench has
_________________
5
(2012) 6 SCC 403
6
(2012) 11 SCC 768
Criminal Appeal Nos.333-334 of 2017 Page 13 of 16
laid down that the extra-judicial confession is a weak
evidence by itself and it has to be examined by the court
with greater care and caution; that it should be made
voluntarily and should be truthful; that it should inspire
confidence; that an extra-judicial confession attains
greater credibility and evidentiary value if it is supported
by a chain of cogent circumstances and is further
corroborated by other prosecution evidence; that for an
extra-judicial confession to be the basis of conviction, it
should not suffer from any material discrepancies and
inherent improbabilities; and that such statement
essentially has to be proved like any other fact and in
accordance with law."
Bodh Raj @ Bodha And Ors vs State Of Jammu And Kashmir on 3 September, 2002
In the case of Bodh Raj Alias Bodha v/s State of Jammu and
Kashmir2, Rambraksh v/s State of Chhattisgarh 3 , Anjan Kumar
Sharma v/s State of Assam4 following principle of law, in this
regard, has been enunciated:-