The purpose of re-examination is clear from the bare language of Section 138 of the Evidence Act. It reads: 138: Order of Examination – Witnesses shall be first examined-in chief then (if the adverse party so desires) cross-examined, then (if the party calling him so desires) re-examined. .. .. Direction of re-examination.—The re-examination shall be directed […]
Section 313 (1) (b) of CrPC obligates a trial court, after the prosecution evidence is complete, to question the accused “generally on the case…for the purpose of enabling the accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him”. The product of this exercise is generally referred to as ‘Section 313 Statement’, the […]
“Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done.” And, it would seen to be done only if there is proper marshalling & appreciation of evidences, which is the backbone of any Judgement or Order. Though having pivotal importance, interestingly, these two terms have nowhere been defined in any statute. Marshalling […]
The general principle is that if a cognizable offence has taken place (and forgery is a cognizable offence!) any person can get an FIR registered. This should hold true for forgery and filing of forged documents in court too, right? Well, the answer is Yes. But this issue wasn’t settled for a very long time. The confusion […]
The Certificate u/s 65B is not required to be on an affidavit. Though normally to be filed along with the electronic record (print-out, USB drive, etc), it can be filed subsequently too, either as a supplementary chargesheet, or by resort to S.311/391 of the CrPC. In Civil cases, the certificate can be brought on record subsequently by relying upon […]
[1] This is a guest post by Ms. Sonam Singh, an officer of the Delhi Judicial Services. This column was first published at Bar & Bench. It was the first day at work for a junior lawyer, at Tis Hazari Courts. His senior had asked him to go to the Court for a matter: His senior […]
By Bharat Chugh. [1] First published one SCC Online Blog here. On the legality of compelling an accused to disclose his smartphone/laptop password, or open his phone through face-scan, or fingerprint and the constitutional protection against self-incrimination. Our smartphones are an extension of our minds and souls. Our deepest desires. Our darkest secrets. Our smartphones know […]
Not much of a difference. Frankly, there has been much ado about nothing. The general belief is that a document which is given an ‘Exhibit’ number is usually held to be legally admissible. For instance, original documents are given the nomenclature of ‘Exhibits’ by the Court and accepted in evidence as ‘Exhibit A’, ‘Exhibit B’ […]
Well, they are not. Supreme Court says so in the very lucidly written – State of Jharkhand & Ors v. Brahmputra Mettalics Ltd. Ranchi & Another (2020 SCC OnLine SC 968) that all students of administrative and civil law should absolutely read. The occasion to clarify this arose in a case where a company (let’s […]
Bharat Chugh 