Conclusion of Distt. Judge that trial Judge had recorded his judgment with pencil in his own hands comprising 33 pages and it was impossible that such a judgment could be written in 45 minutes and that too while Trial...
Law Points
where a will is charged with suspicion, the rules enjoin a reasonable scepticism, not an obdurate persistence in disbelief. They do not demand from the Judge, even in circumstances of grave suspicion, a resolute and impenetrable incredulity. He is...
Vadivelu Thevar Versus The State of Madras-12/04/1957-Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act-Witness—Number of witnesses—ordinarily the Court cannot insist on plurality of witnesses for conviction for murder—It is the quality and not quantity of witness which matters.
The decision of this Court in the case of Vemireddy Satyanarayan Reddy vs. State of Hyderabad, (1956) SCR 247 (B) was also relied upon in support of the contention that in a murder case the court insists on corroboration...
Dr. Jai Shankar (Lunatic) through Vijay Shankar brother guardian Vs State of Himachal Pradesh-Criminal Procedure Code, 1898—Section 464—Procedure to be followed by Magistrate holding inquiry when there is an allegation and suspicion that the accused is of unsound mind...
Kewal Krishan Vs Suraj-Section 209 of the Code of 1973- Bhan and another-Both these cases exclusively triable by the Court of Session, one instituted on a police report under Section 173, Criminal Procedure Code and the other initiated on...
Can a “special Court” under SC/ST Act, take direct cognizance without committal proceeding
14 min read
Gangula Ashok and another Vs State of ANDHRA PRADESH-28/01/2000.-we have no doubt that a Special Court under this Act is essentially a Court of Session and it can take cognizance of the offence when the case is committed to...
