Whether the statement of the accused can be considered a confession?
Whether the statement of the deceased to his wife that he is going to Berhampur to take back his loan was considered a dying declaration?
Dying declarations are exceptions to the hearsay rule where it is believed that a person who makes a statement in expectation of his/her death would not lie.
Can the recorded dying declaration of the deceased be ignored merely because the doctor had not made the endorsement that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the statement?
The dying declaration of the deceased thus recorded cannot be ignored merely because the doctor had not made the endorsement that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the statement in question.
The juristic theory regarding the acceptability of a dying declaration is that such declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death and when every hope of this world is gone when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the man is induced by the most powerful consideration to speak only the truth.
Whether an 8-year delay in the identification test can lead to the inadmissibility of such identification?
Identification of a person has been dealt with under section 9 of the Evidence Act. When the identity of a person is in question, identification by parents, wife or other relatives is relevant. Test Identification Parade is conducted under this section to aid the investigation of an offence.
Whether the three test identification parade conducted by the police and the lack of other forms of evidence sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused?
Section 9 – This section deals with the identification of an accused by the witnesses and how the same can be a substantive piece of evidence when a test identification parade is conducted, and the witness corroborates that in court.
Section 27 -The basic idea embedded in Section 27 of the Evidence Act is the doctrine of confirmation by a subsequent event. Some discoveries made by the police on the basis of the accused's statement can corroborate the statement that he gave to the police.
Whether failure to hold a test identification parade makes the evidence of identification in court inadmissible?
Section 9 Indian Evidence Act- Identification of a person, has been dealt with under section 9 of the Evidence Act. When the identity of a person is in question, identification by parents, wife or other relatives is relevant. Test Identification Parade is conducted under this section to aid the investigation of an offence. But this is not seen as substantive proof unless corroborated by the witness in court.
Whether the statements recorded under 32(1) under the apprehension of the witness's death be used as res gestae under section 6 if the victim, subsequently, survives?
The rule of res gestae mentioned under section 6, of the Indian Evidence Act, is an exception to the principle that hearsay evidence is not admissible in a court of law. It states that if facts form a part of the same transaction as the facts in issue, then such facts are also relevant.
Whether a tape-recorded conversation is admissible as evidence?
If the evidence was admissible, the manner in which it was obtained is irrelevant.
The Judge has the discretion to allow the evidence in a criminal case if the rules of admissibility of evidence would operate unfairly against the accused.
Are Sections 132(1) and 132(5) of Rule 112(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and (g) and 31 of the Constitution of India?
Can a writ of Prohibition to restrain the authorities from using the ‘information gathered from the documents seized’ should be issued?
When one has to consider the reasonableness of the restrictions or curbs placed on the freedoms mentioned in Art. 19(i) (f) and (g), one cannot possibly ignore how such evasions eat into the vitals of the economic life of the community. Therefore, in the interest of the community, it is only right that the fiscal authorities should have sufficient powers to prevent tax evasion.
If the safeguards while 'carrying out search and seizure are generally on the lines adopted by the Criminal Procedure Code they would be regarded as adequate and render the temporary restrictions imposed by these measures as reasonable.
Is it the mandatory requirement of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (Act for short) that when an officer, duly authorized under Section 42 of the Act, is about to search a person he must inform him of his right under sub-section (1) thereof of being taken to the nearest Gazetted Officer or nearest Magistrate for making the search?
If any search is made without informing the person of his such right would the search be illegal even if he does not of his own exercise his right under Section 50(1)?
Whether a trial held in respect of any recovery of contraband articles pursuant to such a search would be void ab initio?
Whether compliance with Section 50 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 mandatory?
The right to be searched before a gazetted officer or magistrate is an extremely valuable right that Parliament has provided to an accused, given the serious consequences that possessing illegal items under the Act may entail.
Whether the chain of circumstance was complete because the case was mainly decided on circumstantial evidence and if the evidence shows clearly the guilt of the accused.
Whether the decision is given by the Supreme Court in giving the death sentence to life imprisonment is valid or not?
Section 34, 37, 302, 201, 120-B of IPC.