Evidence Act

Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar vs State Of Karnataka 2024 INSC 320 – S 378 CrPC – S 27 Evidence Act

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 378,386– scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:-(a) That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; (b) That the same …

Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar vs State Of Karnataka 2024 INSC 320 – S 378 CrPC – S 27 Evidence Act Read More »

Hansraj vs State Of MP 2024 INSC 318 – S 27 Evidence Act

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ; Section 27- For proving a disclosure memo recorded at the instance of the accused, the Investigating Officer would be required to state about the contents of the disclosure memo and in absence thereof, the disclosure memo and the discovery of facts made in pursuance thereto would not be considered as …

Hansraj vs State Of MP 2024 INSC 318 – S 27 Evidence Act Read More »

Manisha Mahendra Gala vs Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani 2024 INSC 293 – Easements – Power Of Attorney- S 107 CPC

Power Of Attorney – Power of Attorney holder can only depose about the facts within his personal knowledge and not about those facts which are not within his knowledge or are within the personal knowledge of the person who he represents or about the facts that may have transpired much before he entered the scene …

Manisha Mahendra Gala vs Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani 2024 INSC 293 – Easements – Power Of Attorney- S 107 CPC Read More »

Ravishankar Tandon vs State Of Chhattisgarh 2024 INSC 299 – S 27 Evidence Act- Circumstantial Evidence

Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Section 27 – For bringing the case under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, it will be necessary for the prosecution to establish that, based on the information given by the accused while in police custody, it had led to the discovery of the fact, which was distinctly within the knowledge …

Ravishankar Tandon vs State Of Chhattisgarh 2024 INSC 299 – S 27 Evidence Act- Circumstantial Evidence Read More »

Pankaj Singh vs State Of Haryana 2024 INSC 254 – S 114A Evidence Act- Presumption Of Innocence – S 294 CrPC

Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Section 114A – The condition precedent for applicability of Section 114A of the Evidence Act is that the prosecution must be for the offence of rape under various clauses set out therein under sub-Section (2) of Section 376 of the IPC – When this condition is not met, the presumption under …

Pankaj Singh vs State Of Haryana 2024 INSC 254 – S 114A Evidence Act- Presumption Of Innocence – S 294 CrPC Read More »

Raghunatha vs State Of Karnataka 2024 INSC 238 -Criminal Trial – Circumstantial Evidence – S 106 Evidence Act- Last Seen Theory

Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Section 106 -Where the prosecution proves that the deceased was last seen in the company of the accused and the death of the deceased has occurred soon thereafter, the burden would shift upon the accused. However, for that, initially the prosecution will have to discharge the burden. Merely because the appellants …

Raghunatha vs State Of Karnataka 2024 INSC 238 -Criminal Trial – Circumstantial Evidence – S 106 Evidence Act- Last Seen Theory Read More »

Ekene Godwin vs State Of Tamil Nadu 2024 INSC 229 – S 148 Evidence Act – S 242 CrPC

Criminal Trial – When the examination-in-chief of a material prosecution witness is being recorded, the presence of the Advocate for the accused is required. He has a right to object to a leading or irrelevant question being asked to the witness. If the trial is conducted in such a manner, an argument of prejudice will …

Ekene Godwin vs State Of Tamil Nadu 2024 INSC 229 – S 148 Evidence Act – S 242 CrPC Read More »

Ravinder Kumar vs State Of NCT Of Delhi 2024 INSC 211 – Ss 27,106 Evidence Act – Circumstantial Evidence

Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Section 27 – For a recovery to be admissible on the statement made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, it has to be from such a place which is exclusively within the knowledge of the maker thereof. When (1) the recovery is from a place accessible to one and all …

Ravinder Kumar vs State Of NCT Of Delhi 2024 INSC 211 – Ss 27,106 Evidence Act – Circumstantial Evidence Read More »

Navas @ Mulanavas vs State Of Kerala 2024 INSC 215 – Criminal Trial – Sentencing – S 106 Evidence Act

Criminal Trial -Sentencing – In the process of arriving at the number of years which the convict will have to undergo before which the remission powers could be invoked, some of the relevant factors that the courts bear in mind are:- (a) the number of deceased who are victims of that crime and their age …

Navas @ Mulanavas vs State Of Kerala 2024 INSC 215 – Criminal Trial – Sentencing – S 106 Evidence Act Read More »

Thakore Umedsing Nathusing vs State Of Gujarat 2024 INSC 198 – Criminal Trial- Circumstantial Evidence- Appeal Against Acquittal- S 25 Evidence Act

Criminal Trial – Circumstantial Evidence – The principles required to bring home the charges in a case based purely on circumstantial evidence have been crystalized in the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116 – “(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn must …

Thakore Umedsing Nathusing vs State Of Gujarat 2024 INSC 198 – Criminal Trial- Circumstantial Evidence- Appeal Against Acquittal- S 25 Evidence Act Read More »