Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.23 seconds)Section 376 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 375 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 315 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 342 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Hate Singh Bhagat Singh vs State Of Madhya Bharat on 2 November, 1951
17. The statement made by the accused is
capable of being used in the trial though to a
limited extent. But the law also places an
Criminal Appeal no.2567 of 2024 etc. Page 7 of 15
obligation upon the court to take into
consideration the stand of the accused in his
statement and consider the same objectively
and in its entirety. This principle of law has
been stated by this Court in Hate Singh Bhagat
Singh v. State of Madhya Bharat. [1951 SCC
1060: AIR 1953 SC 468 : 1953 Cri LJ 1933]”
(emphasis added)
Therefore, the conviction cannot be based solely on the statements
made by an accused under sub-section (1) of Section 313 of the Cr. PC.
The statements of the accused cannot be considered in isolation but in
conjunction with the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The
statements may have more relevance when under a statute, an accused
has burden of discharge. When the law requires an accused to discharge
the burden, the accused can always do so by a preponderance of
probability. But, while considering whether the accused has discharged
the burden, the court can certainly consider his statement recorded
under Section 313. In this case, the accused has no burden to
discharge. In the present case, while appreciating the evidence adduced
by the prosecution, the statements of the three accused that they
maintained a physical relationship with the prosecutrix by paying her
money will have to be considered. Dr. Shashi Thakur (PW-4), who had
examined the victim, noted inflammation in the private parts of the
victim. In the cross-examination, PW-4 opined that it is not necessary
that in a case of forcible sexual intercourse, an injury should be there
on the body of the victim. Absence of injuries on the person of the
prosecutrix is by itself no ground to infer consent on the part of the
prosecutrix.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The State Of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh & Ors on 16 January, 1996
In the decision of this
Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh2, in paragraph
8, this Court held thus: