SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1949 Supreme(Cal) 156

SEN
Abdul Majid – Appellant
Versus
King – Respondent


Advocates:
S.S. Mukherjee - for Petitioner.

ORDER :- This Rule has been obtained by the accused whose application to be given copies of the witnesses statement to the police during the investigation of this case has been refused by the learned trying Magistrate. Against the order of refusal the Sessions Judge was moved to refer the matter to this Court. The learned Sessions Judge stated that the order was bad but he said that the Magistrate may reconsider the order and allow the defence to get copies of the statements made by the witnesses before the police or he may acquit the accused. For these reasons he thought that he should not delay the proceedings by making a reference to this Court.

2. The learned Magistrates order is in my opinion entirely wrong. An accused person is entitled under the provisions of S. 162, Criminal P.C., to get copies of the statements made by persons to the police during an investigation under Ch. 14 of the said Code provided that such persons are examined as witnesses by the prosecution. The accused when he gats such statements is entitled to use them for the purposes of contradiction in the manner provided by S. 145, Evidence Act. Now, S. 162 of the Code states that persons examined by the polic



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top