Govind Vs. State of Gujarat

Govind vs State of Gujarat

Type Court Judgment Court Gujarat Decided Sep 02, 1966

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/735809

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/735809
Court: Gujarat High Court
Judge: V.B. Raju, J.
Decided On: Sep 02, 1966
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 370 of 1965
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 174 and 509; Evidence Act, 1982 - Sections 157

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Govind

Advocate H.K. Thakore, Adv.

Respondent

State of Gujarat

Advocate B.M. Sompura, Asst. Govt. Pleader

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 174 and 509; Evidence Act, 1982 - Sections 157
Reported In: AIR1967Guj288; 1967CriLJ1633a

Excerpt

- (1) the medical officer did not describe the twenty four injuries, which he deposed, he found on the person of the deceased, but he merely stated that he had stated the description of the injuries in the post mortem report. the post mortem report is not evidence, even if it be used to corroborate the evidence of the medical officer. before it can be used to corroborate, there must be evidence in the evidence of a witness, which can be corroborated. in all such cases, it is necessary for the doctor to describe all the injuries in his evidence. the conviction and sentence are, therefore, set aside and the matter is ordered to be re-tried.(2) appeal allowed.

Full Judgment

(1) The Medical officer did not describe the twenty four injuries, which he deposed, he found on the person of the deceased, but he merely stated that he had stated the description of the injuries in the post mortem report. The post mortem report is not evidence, even if it be used to corroborate the evidence of the medical officer. Before it can be used to corroborate, there must be evidence in the evidence of a witness, which can be corroborated. In all such cases, it is necessary for the doctor to describe all the injuries in his evidence. The conviction and sentence are, therefore, set aside and the matter is ordered to be re-tried.

(2) Appeal allowed.

Same Parties Govind vs State of Gujarat Same Subject Criminal Same Judge V.B. Raju, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 174 and 5...

Criminal