Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 34 (0.26 seconds)
Kiran Borkar, Hyderabad., vs The State Of Telangana, Rep Pp., on 4 November, 2022 cites

State Of Orissa vs Debendra Nath Padhi on 29 November, 2004

31. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies on two judgments of Apex Court in Debendra Nath (1 supra) which I referred and in Ajay Kumar Parmar vs. State of Rajasthan(2 12 (2008) 2 SCC 561 13 1996 Cri.LJ 2448 17 supra) in paragraph 16 of the judgment, the Court held that it was not permissible for the Judicial Magistrate to take into consideration the evidence of defence produced by the appellant as it has consistently been held by this Court that at the time of framing the charge, the only documents which are required to be considered are the documents submitted by the investigating agency along with the charge sheet. Any document which the accused wants to rely upon cannot be read as evidence. If such evidence is to be considered, there would be a mini-trial at the stage of framing of charge. That would defeat the very object of the code. Even for hearing submission of accused as per Section 227 means hearing the submissions of the accused on the record of the case as filed by the prosecution and documents submitted therewith and nothing more. Even if, in a rare case it is permissible to consider the defence evidence, if such material convincingly establishes that the whole prosecution version is totally absurd, preposterous or concocted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 35 - Cited by 1174 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next