Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 26 November, 2012 Author: A

confession so made solely by Soma Munda, rather, it is joint confession, since, the confessional statement (Ext.11) contained the thumb impression of Titu Purty ... joint confession so that the confession so made leading to recovery will attract the complicity of the accused persons who have jointly confessed the guilt

confession was recorded as we saw in Ext. P12 which was marked by the I.O as the confession of A1. When the confession ... stated by A1 is that jointly the accused pledged the chain. A joint concealment is different from a joint confession. However, a doubt arises

documented in Ext.P72 mahazar. The relevant portion of the joint confession leading to the recovery of the knife is marked ... knife based on a disclosure statement made in a joint confession statement given by the 1st and 2nd accused to him. The recovery

Singh makes the alleged extra judicial confession doubtful. The alleged extra judicial confession, as already observed, was jointly made by the appellants before PW6 Manjit ... that confession of such a person is devoid of credibility. Moreover, joint confession cannot be accepted. In view of this judgment also, the alleged extra

Hans Raj, the father of the deceased. The extra judicial confession made before Baljit Singh PW10 is devoid of any merit. It has come ... before a person, who was opposed to him (Sham Lal). The joint confession made does not have value in the eyes of law. Another very

others jointly under trial for same offence- When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made ... such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession. Illustrations   (a) A and B are jointly tried

this regard, another instance of requirement of joint trial for admissibility of confession as provided under section 30 of Evidence Act, 1872 may be noted ... such confession. Section 30 of the Evidence Act is reproduced below: “30. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial

expressed his willingness to give confession. The same was apprised by IO Shri Walishetty to Joint C. P. (Crime) who directed DCP Shri Vinod Lokhande ... Police custody on 16th September 2003 expressed willingness to give the confession. Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime) directed DCP Shri Lokhande (PW-88) to record

Police. They asserted that they did not make any confession before P.W.6. indeed, according to them, they were arrested by the police ... mood to approach P.W.6 to make a joint confession. It os significant to note that they had no particular relationship or connection with