Advanced Search Results

Deoman Upadhyaya Vs. State

Court : Allahabad

Subject : CriminalConstitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 13, 14 and 20(3); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 27, 161, 162 and 162(2); Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 25, 26 and 27

Reported in : AIR1960All1; 1960CriLJ1

section that:Nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect the provisions of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872.'When, however, the Code was re-enacted in 1898 this provision was somehow dropped. No question of any conflict between … the each of the two questions is in the negative.22. I agree with my learned brothers that if Sections 27 and 162(2) deny equality before the law they would become void in toto. The whole Section 27 contains

Natibabu Khadka Vs. State of Goa, as Represented by the Anti Narcotic ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Narcotics

Acts : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 20 and 54; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 27; Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 10

Reported in : 1996(5)BomCR76

would be made in the later part of this judgment under sections 8 and 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.3. It is the prosecution case that the appellant was employed as a Driver of the said bus by

M.A. Antony @ Antappan Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 27; Prisoners Act; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 201, 302, 379, 380 and 449; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 161, 164, 164(2), 164(4), 232(2), 313, 366(1), 463 and 533

Reported in : AIR2009SC2549; 2009(57)BLJR2627; JT2009(7)SC372; 2009(6)SCALE36; (2009)6SCC220; 2009(6)LC2759(SC); 2009AIRSCW4448

from residence on the night of 6-7 January, 2001;(e) Recovery of clothes under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short the 'Evidence Act');(f) Fingerprints;(g) Recovery of Scalp hair of the accused/appellant;(h) Judicial Confession;(i) Extra-Judicial Confession10. Stand … a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 449, 379, 380, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') Appellant was

Bejjanki Rajam Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 162 and 367; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 25, 26 and 27; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302; Constitution of India - Article 141

Reported in : AIR1959AP333; 1959CriLJ813

to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. Criminal - admissibility of accused's statement - Sections 25 and 27 of Evidence Act, 1872, Sections 162 and 367 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and Sections 302 and 304 of Indian Penal Code, 1860

Amitsingh Bhikamsing Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Arms Act, 1950 - Sections 3, 5, 25(1B), 27 and 27(5); Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 9, 24, 25, 26 and 27; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 162; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 120B, 341, 379, 396 and 506

Reported in : AIR2007SC676; (2007)3CALLT23(SC); 2007CriLJ1168; RLW2007(2)SC884; 2007(1)SCALE62; (2007)2SCC310; 2007AIRSCW286; (2007)1SCC(Cri)582(SC); (2007)2Crimes40; JT2007(1)SC390; 2007LawHerald(SC)262.

no provision for it in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code') and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short the 'Evidence Act'). It is desirable that a test identification parade should be conducted as soon … was found guilty of offence punishable under Section 5 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1950 (in short the 'Arms Act') and was … Nagar. Learned trial judge had held all the four accused persons to be guilty of offences punishable under Sections 396, 506, 341, 379 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC')

Yakub Abdul Razak Memon. Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Cbi , B ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 - Sections 19, 3(3), 3(2)(i)(ii), 3(3)(4), 5, 6; Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 427, 435, 436, 201, 212, 120B; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 3, 7, 25 (1-A), (1-B)(a); Explosives Act, 1884 - Sections 9B (1)(a)(b)(c); Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sections 3, 4(a)(b), 5, 6

pointed out thatseizure panchnamas were not in accordance with the procedure and, moreparticularly, Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.(v) All the confessional statements are exculpatory and not inculpatory.In view of the same, the entire statements made are … an intent to overawe the Government as by law established, to strike terror in the people, to alienate sections of the people and to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections of the people, i.e. Hindus and

Tahsildar Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 119, 161, 162, 162(1) and 374; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 27, 32, 32(1), 145, 155, 155(3) and 157

Reported in : AIR1959SC1012; 1959CriLJ1231; [1959]Supp(2)SCR875

accused. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect the provisions of section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.' 15. The first two paragraphs of s. 119 of Act 10 of 1872 with slight modifications not relevant … - cross examination - Sections 119, 161, 162, 162 (1) and 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and Sections 27, 32, 32 (1), 145, 155, 155 (3) and 157 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - appellants with other

Natarajan Vs. Union Territory of Pondicherry, Rep. by the Inspector of ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 27; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 162, 162(1) and 162(2)

Reported in : 2003CriLJ2372

to apply to any statement falling within the provisions of clause (1) of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 (1 of 1872), or to affect the provisions of Section 27 of that Act.' The resultant position is … The absence of the signatures or the thumb impression of an accused on the disclosure statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act detracts materially from the authenticity and the reliability of the disclosure statement'.'was made

inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu Vs. Balaprasanna

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 27; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302, 392 and 397; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 164

Reported in : 2008AIRSCW5600; 2008CriLJ4332; JT2008(8)SC242; 2008(10)SCALE466; (2008)11SCC645; 2008(3)Crimes284; 2008(5)LH(SC)3636; 2008 (11) SCC 64

the statements of the accused leading to discovery of materials facts, admissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short the 'Evidence Act').19. Law is well settled that the prosecution while relying upon the confessional statement … be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence. INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860[C.A.No.45/1860] Sections 300, 392 & 397: [Dr.Arijhit Pasayat & P.Sathasivam, JJ] Murder and robbery -Accused, a student in need of

ismail Adam Mitha Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 233(2), 293(2), 313, 374 and 378(1)(3); Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 15 to 23, 25, 29, 35, 35(1), 35(2), 42, 42(1), 54 and 55; Terrorist and Distractive Activities Act; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 3, 21, 27, 57, 101 and 102; Constitution of India - Article 21

Reported in : (2005)2GLR1813

page 162, it was held at head note as under:'CRIMINAL TRIAL--Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985(LXI of 1985)--Sec.20--Evidence Act, 1872(1 of 1872)--Secs. 101 & 102--Accused charged with possession of contraband article--Prosecution to prove that accused was concerned with … nothing to show that the goods were at least in their temporary custody, their conviction under the said sections may not be warranted--At best, they may be held to be the abettors.'12.2. Another judgment relied upon by … was granted for 10 days.5.1 During interrogation of both these accused on 27-6-1995, accused-Ismail Adam Mitha voluntarily offered himself to show other substances of similar