K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI, S.N.VARIAVA
Basavaraj R. Patil – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Thomas, J.-Leave granted.
2. When a criminal court completes prosecution evidence (other than in summons cases) is it indispensably mandatory that the accused himself should be questioned? Can not the court allow the advocate to answer such questions on behalf of the accused at least in some exigent conditions? A two Judge Bench of this Court has held in Usha K. Pillai v. Raj K. Srinivas & Ors.1 that there is no alternative to it permissible under law. When such an issue arose in this case before this Court, a Bench of two Judges made a reference to a larger Bench for reconsideration of the legal position stated in Usha K. Pillai (supra).
3. The aforesaid question arose in this case from the following factual background: First appellant - a software engineer (now stationed in USA) is the husband of second respondent Ms. Arundathi. Their marriage was solemnised in November 1992 and a female child was born to them. But eventually their connubial life passed through bad weather and the situation reached a stage when Arundathi moved a Judicial Magistrate of First Class for maintenance allowance from her husband. An order in her favour was passed by the said magistrate under Secti
Bibhuti Bhusan Das Gupta & Anr. v. State of West Bengal
Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab
Hate Singh Bhagat Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh Bharat
Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. v. State of West Bengal
State of Maharashtra v. Lakshman Jairam
S. Harnam Singh v. The State (Delhi Admn.) AIR 1976 SC 2140. (Para 32)
Usha K. Pillai v. Raj K. Srinivas & Ors.
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Anandji Haridas & Co. v. Engg. Mazdoor Sangh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.