Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.41 seconds)
S. Sudhakar vs P. Sekar on 8 October, 2018 cites

K.S.Panduranga vs State Of Karnataka on 1 March, 2013

9 However, on a reading of the judgment of the Sessions Court, it is seen that it has not merely dismissed the appeal for default, but, has pored over the records and has passed a detailed judgment assigning reasons for dismissing the appeal. Further, in K.S. Panduranga vs. State of Karnataka1, the Supreme Court has held that in a criminal case, even if the appellant or his counsel does not diligently prosecute the case, it is open to the Court to go through the records and pass appropriate orders. In fact, Section 386 Cr.P.C. very clearly states “After perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears.........”. This means that it is not necessary for the appellate Court to indefinitely wait for the counsel for the appellant to present the case. Therefore, this Court does not find any infirmity in the procedure adopted by the Sessions Court in going through the records and deciding the case. (emphasis added) http://www.judis.nic.in 1 (2013) 3 SCC 721 5 10 The learned counsel for the accused submitted that both the Courts below had failed to appreciate the fact that the debt was not established by the complainant through legal evidence. He also contended that both the Courts have failed to appreciate the evidence of the accused who examined himself as D.W.1 and marked Ex.D.1, which is a notice that was sent by the mother of the accused to the wife of the complainant, wherein, it is stated that the cheque was obtained under coercion with the help of police.
Supreme Court of India Cites 50 - Cited by 412 - D Misra - Full Document
1   2 Next