Topic Details
Topics Headnote Judgement
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — Rape — offence of — Adult Prosecutrix — Admission by —she was in relationship with the appellant for the last two years prior to the incident and the appellant used to stay overnight at her residence— the case set up by the prosecutrix seems to be highly unrealistic and unbelievable— Acquittal upheld— IPC — S 376. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — Recovery — Blood sample & soil samples were collected — not sent for FSL examination — serious lacunae in the investigating procedure that a necessary test was not conducted — Fatal to prosecution — IPC — S 376. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — Recovery & identification of the clothes of the deceased — contradiction in the evidence of witness — evidence of witness not supported by medical evidence — Held, serious doubt is raised not only on recovery of the undergarments, but also upon the identification test. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 8 — Previous or subsequent conduct of the accused — Case of prosecution — a few days prior to the fateful day, when the accused made the deceased sit on his lap and kissed her, for which the accused was rebuked and beaten by the father of the deceased — no such fact was deposed by the PWs in their statement to the police — Held, mere snugging the deceased once, in itself, is no ground to connect the accused with the alleged incident —Acquittal upheld — IPC — Ss 302, 376(2)(f) & 201. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — Circumstantial Evidence — Case purely based on — Duty of Prosecution — Tests to be established — (i) The circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogent and firm; —(ii) Those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; —(iii) The circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and —(iv) The circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused — and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — Ss 3 & 8 —Relevant fact & conduct of witness — Hostile witness —eyewitnesses failed to support the prosecution — PW denied of having been acquainted to the accused & could not say whether the accused appearing in the court were the same persons — In cross-examination, he did not own up any part of the previous statement — Fatal to prosecution. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — related witness — PW was the real maternal uncle of the deceased — allegedly present as an eyewitness — Held, It is unnatural for him not to have come to the rescue of his nephew even when he had identified him as the victim — Fatal to prosecution. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 —Relevant fact —Ocular evidence & Medical Evidence — Contradiction between — Accused allegedly stuffed the mouth of deceased with soil — testimony of Medical Officer — no soil was found in the mouth of the deceased — Held, circumstances lead to the inference that the prosecution has failed to bring home its case. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 —Relevant fact — Fitness Certificate —nowhere states that the deceased was in a fit and stable mental condition at the time of making the statement — Evidence Act — S 32 —Dying declaration. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 —Relevant fact — Letters allegedlly written by the deceased — deposition of Executive Magistrate — that the deceased was illiterate and the dying declaration was read over and explained to her— Held, these two facts are self-contradictory and severely detrimental to the prosecution case. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 —Relevant fact — Improvements in the evidence of witnesses — witnesses have not stated the facts to the police and it was only before the Court that such material improvements were made to support the prosecution case— Fatal to prosecution. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 —Relevant fact — Defective investigation — Case of burn injuries — Held, there ought to have effect of the incident in the house— the place of occurrence — the seizure of surrounding material was also important— no such efforts were made — Held, the Investigating Officer seemed to have deliberately or negligently erred in investigating the case. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Shadow witness — Evidence of — not deposed as to the exact conversation between the appellant and the complainant — at the time when he had approached him to give bribe money — the witness simply mentioned about “some talk” had taken place between them but — has failed to bring to light the factum of demand of bribe money by the appellant from the complainant — Held, it is amply clear that panch witness did not hear the conversation between the appellant and the complainant — Demand not proved. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 8 — Conduct of witness — Friend of witness — testimony of — Over heard accused persons conspiring with one another about finishing the deceased — did not care to warn the deceased or his family — Held, makes his conduct highly unnatural and his presence doubtful at the place of incident. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 8 — Motive —alone cannot be sufficient to convict the accused as it is not substantive evidence and is merely corroborative in nature. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 11 — When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant —Pea of alibi — Was in a marriage function on the relevant day — Contradiction in the evidence of the PWs — a deviation from the earlier statement — Evidence of defence witnesses — specifically deposed that the accused was present during and after the function and stayed there at night — Held, This also explains the absence of the accused in his village in the morning of the incident — Independent witness — statement of —accused was not in the village on the fateful night as he had gone to the marriage ceremony in other village — The said factum of marriage ceremony and function in other village has been admitted even by the family members of the deceased —Plea accepted. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 32 —Dying declaration — Unexplained delay in recording, thumb impression — FIR lodged next day based on dying declaration — Held, No explanation as to in whose custody the said crucial piece of evidence was placed for one full day—Fatal to Prosecution. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 32 —Dying declaration — reliance placing solely on — It is a settled law that dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction and it does not require any corroboration — But it is equally true that dying declaration goes against the cardinal principle of law that 'evidence must be direct' — dying declaration must be judged and appreciated in light of the surrounding circumstances and its weight determined by reference to the principle governing the weighing of evidence. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 45 — Expert opinion — cause of death — the expert did not clearly establish the finding in his opinion— He merely said that the possibility cannot be ruled out — of no help to prosecution. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Criminal Jurisprudence — Duty of Prosecution — Evidence Act — S 105 — Burden of Proof — Explanation of Prosecution — it was unable to find the handwriting of the deceased by any other means — Held, prosecution had a duty to establish the veracity of such an important piece of evidence. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 106 — Burden of proving facts within special knowledge — Evidence of witness he saw the accused close to the place where deceased was found dead — Held, did not state such an important fact to the police officer — Although he alleged that the said fact was known to him yet the report was lodged against an unknown person — Held, his statement fails to adduce confidence — none of the details as to the distance, surrounding, etc. were given — The source of light in which the witness saw the accused is also not stated — Testimony rightly rejected. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 145 — Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing — Deposition of a witness — recording of — Duty of the trial court — to ensure that the part of the police statement — with which it is intended to contradict the witness — is brought to the notice of the witness in his cross-examination V.K. Mishra v. State of Uttarakhand —Relied upon. PDF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Evidence Act — S 145 — Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing — Mode of proof — Duty of the trial court — The attention of witness is drawn to that part and this must reflect in his cross-examination by reproducing it — If the witness admits the part intended to contradict him, it stands proved and there is no need to further proof of contradiction and it will be read while appreciating the evidence — If he denies having made that part of the statement, his attention must be drawn to that statement and must be mentioned in the deposition — By this process the contradiction is merely brought on record, but it is yet to be proved — Thereafter when investigating officer is examined in the court, his attention should be drawn to the passage marked for the purpose of contradiction — it will then be proved in the deposition of the investigating officer — who again by referring to the police statement will depose about the witness having made that statement — The process again involves referring to the police statement and culling out that part with which the maker of the statement was intended to be contradicted — If the witness was not confronted with that part of the statement with which the defence wanted to contradict him — then the court cannot suo motu make use of statements to police not proved in compliance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act that is, by drawing attention to the parts intended for contradiction — V.K. Mishra v. State of Uttarakhand —Relied upon. PDF