Sikkim Court May 1984 Judgments

Punya Prasad Sankota and anr. Vs. Balvadra Dahal and anr.

Court: Sikkim

Reported in: 1985CriLJ159

Bhattacharjee, J.1. The learned Judicial Magistrate refused to allow the accused to contradict the prosecution witnesses with reference to their previous statements recorded by the police on the ground that such statements were not recorded by the police in the course of any investigation under the provisions of Chap. XIV of the Cr.P.C. 1898, and, therefore, could not attract the provisions of Section 162(1) of the Code, under the proviso' whereof the accused is entitled to contradict the prosecution witnesses with reference to their previous statements only when those are recorded by the police in the course of any investigation under Chap. XIV of the Code. In Sikkim, Cr.P.C. of 1973 has not yet been extended and we are still governed by the earlier Code of 1898. But it may be noted that the provisions of Section 162 of the new Code of 1973 are almost verbatim reproduction of the provisions of Section 162 of the Code of 1898, save for the new Explanation added to the section in the Co...