Evidence Act Sections 33 - Judgment Search Results

R.K. Agarwal Vs. the Secy. Brdb and Others

Court: Delhi

in sub-para (iii) it is apparent that the Inquiry Officer had in mind Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act and not Section 32) 24. Supplying the report of the Inquiry Officer to the petitioner as also advise … by the Inquiry Officer in the following terms:- “iii) Statement of person not available is relevant (as per section 32 of I.E.A.), if the person was not be found or whose attendance cannot be produced without on

Gheetirala Rama Murthy Vs. Gheetirala Venugopal and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD415; 2003(2)ALT668

Exs. B-28, B-29 and B-32 are not admissible in evidence in view of Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act.12. While seeking to repel the said contentions, the learned Counsel for the respondent on the other hand would … case in C.C.No. 179 of 1988 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Giddalur under section 379 of the IPC and the plaintiff was convicted and sentenced to suffer three months S.I. and to

Nathu and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1970WLN361

committing court on April 1, 1967, was placed on record in accordance with the provisions of Section 33, Evidence Act. In their statements recorded under Section 342, Cr. P. C, mostly the accused persons raised pleas of alibi. … station, Peelwa, by Mst. Sayari, accompanied by D W. 4 Kan Singh. The police registered a case under Sections 302 & 324, I.P.C, and carried out investigation. The police reached the spot before long. Autopsy of the

Asokan Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2005CriLJ3848; 2005(3)KLT770

Clause (a) of Sub-section (4) of Section 306 Cr.P.C., is relevant and admissible under Section 33 of the Evidence Act during the subsequent trial in which he is not available for examination by reason of his death in … the examination of an approver as a witness under Section 306(4)(a) and the examination of a witness under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. While in the case of the former, the approver is examined at the post-cognizance

Queen-empress Vs. Ishri Singh

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (1886)ILR8All672

repetition of it will involve very serious consequences. Criminal Procedure Code, Section 512 - Act I of 1872 (Evidence Act), Sections 33, 157--Witness, threatening--Duty of Magistrate. - - 4. With regard to the depositions of the witnesses who were examined

Ratan Gond Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1959SC18; 1959CriLJ108; [1959]1SCR1336

the statements of Aghani were not admissible in evidence either under section 32 or section 33 of the Evidence Act (1 of 1872). As we are of the view that this contention is correct, we are omitting all … occurrence before her statements could be recorded in a judicial proceeding, were not admissible in evidence either under sections 32 or section 33 of the Evidence Act. Section 33 is clearly out of the way because Aghani

Mohamed Ghouse Vs. the State

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1965CriLJ288

T.V. Mariyappa's) handwriting. The prosecution purported to adduce this evidence under Section 33 of the Evidence Act. The learned Sessions Judge has not only admitted … as an Assistant Surgeon in the Victoria Hospital on 13th of June 1962 under Section S3 of the Evidence Act. Dr. T. V. Mariyappa was in charge of the Emergency Ward on the night of the incident and … Appellant Bombay Ghouse alias Mohammad Ghouse of Bangalore City has been convicted of an offence of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life by the second Additional Sessions

Modi Nathubhai Motilal and ors. Vs. Chhotubhai Manibhai Desai

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: AIR1962Guj68; (1962)0GLR418

suit be decided accordingly.' The question is whether in view of the provisions of Section 165 of the Evidence Act, the parties can lead evidence in a manner other than that provided in the Evidence Act. Section 165 … must be deemed to have b en abrogated by the Hindu Succession Act of 1956. in particular, by Sections 4 and 6 because under the new Law of Succession, the daughter also gets a share in the … for the appellant relied on Godhanram v. Jahamall Puglia, ILR 40 Calcutta 335 and in particular, on the following observations at page 339; ''It is

B. Mallamma and ors. Vs. V.T.V. Ranga Chary

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(6)ALT36

a ruling in B.G. Tilak v. Shrinivas, AIR 1915 P.C., in which their Lordships were pleased to hold:'(a) Evidence Act, Section 33 - Depositions in a previous criminal trial are inadmissible except as in Section 33 or to … in B.G. Tilak v. Shrinivas, AIR 1915 P.C., in which their Lordships were pleased to hold:'(a) Evidence Act, Section 33 - Depositions in a previous criminal trial are inadmissible except as in Section 33 or to contradict

Smt. Maya Rani Basu @ Bose Vs. Saroj Kumar Basu and ors.

Court: Jharkhand

Reported in: [2004(3)JCR465(Jhr)]

learned Court below held the evidence of this witness admissible under Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act … only one witness is sufficient to prove attestation. In this connection he referred to Section 68 of the Evidence Act, wherein it has been laid down that to prove a Will at least one attesting witness be examined … 27.10.1978 and made petitioner Maya Rani Basu as executor of the Will. The appellant-petitioner filed a petition under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of Probate stating inter alia therein that she has been