Filter by Date
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Sandeep and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Appeal (Crl.), 1554 of 2014, Judgment Date: May 26, 2015

The incompatibility or inconsistency can be said to arise if the assertions in one dying declaration are so diametrically opposed to the statements in the other that both cannot stand together. 21. In view of the above, the law on the issue of dying declaration can be summarised to the effect that in case the court comes to the conclusion that the dying declaration is true and reliable, has been recorded Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Vutukuru Lakshmaiah Versus State of Andhra Pradesh

Appeal (Crl.), 2047 of 2008, Judgment Date: Apr 24, 2015

Dealing with the concept of chance witness, a two-Judge Bench in Rana Pratap and others v. State of Haryana[8], has observed that:- “We do not understand the expression “chance witnesses”. Murders are not committed with previous notice to witnesses, soliciting their presence. If murder is committed in a dwelling house, the inmates Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

RAMAKANT MISHRA @ LALU ETC. Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Appeal (Crl.), 1279-1281 of 2011, Judgment Date: Feb 27, 2015

Succinctly stated, it had been held therein that the use of word 'shown' instead of 'proved' in Section 304B indicates that the onus cast on the prosecution would stand satisfied on the anvil of a mere preponderance of probability. In other words, 'shown' will have to be read up to mean 'proved' but only to the extent of preponderance of probability. Thereafter, the word 'deemed' Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

TEJRAM PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Appeal (Crl.), 1330 of 2009, Judgment Date: Feb 26, 2015

  The decision of this appeal will rest on the answers to the  following two questions : (i)   Reliability of DD Exhibit 45 recorded by PSI Sunil Eknadi  Wanjari  PW 4 made by deceased Savita; (ii)  Admissibility and reliability of DDs made  by  Prabhabai  recorded  by SJM, Rajiv Babarao Raut Exhibit 41) and PSI Bhila Narayan Bachao (Exhibit 43). ​ However,  the Court must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit mental  condition  to make the  DD  and  that  the  statement  was  faithfully  recorded  and  was otherwise reliable.  Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

DASIN BAI @ SHANTI BAI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Appeal (Crl.), 827 of 2008, Judgment Date: Feb 11, 2015

  -This Court has observed in a number of cases, that there is no reason to doubt the veracity of the dying declaration especially, since there is consistency between them. In the case of Ravi & Anr. v State of T.N. (2004 (10) SCC 776), it has been held by this Court that if the truthfulness or otherwise of the dying declaration cannot be doubted, the same Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

HARISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Appeal (Crl.), 1297 of 2011, Judgment Date: Dec 16, 2014

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

MALLELLA SHYAMSUNDER Vs. STATE OF A.P.

Appeal (Crl.), 1381 of 2011, Judgment Date: Oct 29, 2014

Full Judgment

Chhatisgarh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Rajendra @ Matauva & Ors Vs State of Chhattisgarh And Rakesh & Anr Vs The State of Chhattisgarh

CRA->CRIMINAL APPEAL, 557,984 of 2009, Judgment Date: Mar 06, 2014

Dying declaration is also a kind of evidence. Courts are required to scrutinize the dying declaration on the basis of other surrounding and attending circumstances minutely.  Part of dying declaration corroborated by other attending circumstances can be relied upon and part of dying declaration not corroborated by attending circumstances is not safe to rely. Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Krishan Vs. State of Haryana

Appeal (Crl.), 766 of 2008, Judgment Date: Dec 13, 2012

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Sharda Vs. State of Rajasthan

Appeal (Crl.), 699 of 2008, Judgment Date: Dec 15, 2009

Full Judgment

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
  • Last