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

1971 Supreme(Ori) 121

B.K.PATRA, R.N.MISRA, G.K.MISRA
KIRTAN SAHU AFTER HIM UMA SAHUANI – Appellant
Versus
THAKUR SAHU – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.Harichandan, B.K.BEHAR, B.MOHANTY, M.MOHANTY, M.Mohapatr

R. N. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) WHEN this appeal came up for disposal before a Division Bench, the admissibility of the electoral rolls prepared under the Representation of the People Act arose for consideration. A Division Bench of this Court in (1970) 36 Cut LT 1211 (Paramananda Sahu v. Babu Sahu) had taken the view that such electoral rolls were not admissible in evidence under Section 35 of the Evidence Act. In three other cases the same view had also been taken. As the Division Bench in seisin of this First Appeal was of the view that the earlier Bench decision of this Court did not correctly decide the question the following point has been formulated and referred for the opinion of the Full Bench under Rule 3 of Chapter V of the Orissa High Court Rules, Volume I:

"whether the electoral roll prepared under the Representation of the people Act is inadmissible in evidence without the author thereof and the person supplying the information being examined in the case. "

( 2 ) SECTION 35 of the Evidence Act provides:

"any entry in any public or other official book, register or record, stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and made by a public servant in the discharge of his official duty













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