Skip to content


Indian Evidence Act 1872 Amending Act 1 - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: indian evidence act 1872 amending act 1 Year: 2011 Page 1 of about 639 results (2.22 seconds)
Dec 10 2011 (HC)

Panjali Alias Savaridoss and ors. Vs. the State

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-10-2011

120 b 148 and 302 r w 34 of the indian penal code for the offence under section 120 b of the prosecution has failed to bring on record promptly the evidences collected during investigation were not properly brought on record by statement becomes admissible under section 27 of the indian evidence act 1872 per contra if only the fact so discovered is be admissible under section 27 of the indian evidence act 1872 such a relevancy can be established by many ways mostly confession said to have been given by the accused nos 1 2 and 4 to pw 24 in the presence of

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 30 2011 (HC)

C.Chandrasekaran Vs. R.Srinivasan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-30-2011

hence comes within the purview of section 56 of the indian contract act further the honourable apex court has held that alleged panchayatars has been examined as pw3 and his specific evidence is not in consonance with the alleged panchayat and the an obligation imposed by section 16 of the specific relief act on the court not to grant specific performance to a has dealt with section 56 of the indian contract act 1872 and ultimately observed that ldquo doctrine of frustration of contract honourable apex court has held that ldquo as per section 16 c of the specific relief act xlvii of 1963 pleas

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 22 2011 (HC)

Dayashankar and Others Vs. Jaishankar Since Deceased Through His Legal ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Nov-22-2011

should additionally satisfy the requirement of section 63 of the indian succession act 1925 and section 68 of the indian evidence law to be attested it shall not be used as evidence until one attesting witness at least has been called for section 63 c of the act of 1925 and the act of 1872 and whether or not the will is surrounded act 1925 and section 68 of the indian evidence act 1872 in terms whereof the propounder of a will must prove of an unprivileged will section 68 of the act of 1982 postulates the mode and manner and proof of execution of

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 18 2011 (HC)

Radha Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-18-2011

punished in terms of sections 166 and 217 of the indian penal code this approach will draw equibalance between the triangular piece of evidence for the purpose of corroborating the oral evidence adduced at the trial the importance of the above report police and while even conducting the pre registration inquiry they acted unfairly still a third class of cases is where despite complaint which occurred in previous two codes of 1861 and 1872 was deleted and in that place the word information was rolls in his book titled the due process of law 1980 edn in chap i of part three has observed about

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 04 2011 (SC)

Krishan Kumar Malik Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-04-2011

indian evidence act 1872 nbsp 35 section 6 of the indian evidence act 1872 nbsp has an exception to the general guilty for commission of an offence of rape the solitary evidence of prosecutrix is sufficient provided the same inspires confidence and then why this wavering in the number of persons these acts or omissions of prosecutrix cannot be said to be minor now deal with section 6 of the indian evidence act 1872 nbsp wich reads as under nbsp 6 relevancy of facts might be habitual to sexual intercourse prior to 23 06 1994 her medico legal report and medical evidence further reveal that

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 12 2011 (HC)

State Vs. Ved Prakash @ Kalu

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-12-2011

in sub section 4 of section 65 b of the indian evidence act 1872 however as observed by the supreme court sent for comparison were the result of manipulation of prosecution evidence he submitted that the prosecution has remained steadfast in its a criminal conspiracy to kill shivani bhatnagar deceased who was actually killed by pradeep sharma in execution of the said conspiracy 4 of section 65 b of the indian evidence act 1872 we have examined exhibit pw135 28 in the light of recovery of 3 lacs has also not been established discussion 108 we may say straightaway that insofar as the state appeals

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 12 2011 (HC)

State Vs. Ved Prakash Sharma

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-12-2011

of sub section 4 of section 65 b of the indian evidence act 1872 we have examined exhibit pw135 28 in the murder took place in 1999 and there is no evidence of any meeting between satya prakash and r k sharma pawan sharma submitted that pradeep sharma was the person who actually killed shivani bhatnagar he submitted that pradeep sharma entered navkunj 4 of section 65 b of the indian evidence act 1872 however as observed by the supreme court there is no submitted that although cdr for mobile no 9811008825 ex pw 135 28 from 03 01 1999 to 23 01 1999 is

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 12 2011 (HC)

Shri Bhagwan Sharma Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-12-2011

trial court had placed reliance on section 10 of the indian evidence act to suggest that things said or done by the police are admissible under section 27 of the indian evidence act was according to the learned counsel for the appellant adducing secondary evidence under the other provisions of the evidence act namely sections 63 and 65 it may be that the 4 of section 65 b of the indian evidence act 1872 we have examined exhibit pw135 28 in the light of the prosecution examined pw 105 mrs abha singh and pw 106 mr dk singh both of whom admitted knowing rk sharma

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 13 2011 (HC)

Virpal at Raju at Vira and ors. Vs. the State of Nct of Delhi

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-13-2011

not forget that illustration a to section 114 of the indian evidence act 1872 is only an illustration of the substantive dw1 his wife shugufta testified as dw2 after considering the evidence on record and the arguments advanced on behalf of the invoking illustration a of section 114 of the indian evidence act 1872 according to him the said illustration could only be illustration a to section 114 of the indian evidence act 1872 is only an illustration of the substantive provision contained in also sentenced under section 394 ipc to rigourous imprisonment for 10 years as also to pay a fine of rs 2500

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 31 2011 (HC)

Moti at Mohit Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-31-2011

the specimen finger impressions and therefore section 73 of the indian evidence act had been violated we do not agree with case of the prosecution is based on the alleged circumstantial evidence the most important elements of the evidence being the testimonies measurements which as per section 2 a of the said act included the taking of finger impressions she submitted that such investigation to which section 73 of the indian evidence act 1872 did not apply inasmuch as the said section 73 would of them in the party between 12 00 midnight and 12 30 a m thus according to the learned counsel for

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //