Back
Lahore High Court
Coldstream, J.
Sadulla - Appellant
Versus
Emperor - Respondent
Decided On : 25-10-1937
JUDGMENT
Coldstream, J. - This application is not opposed. Counsel states that it is necessary to call the trying Magistrate to prove that the witnesses to be cross-examined were the persons who made statements which were recorded under Section 164, Criminal P.C. The records of such statements are presumed to be genuine (see Section 80, Evidence Act) and this fact that the person who made a statement under Section 164, Criminal P.C. is the person in Court can be proved by the police officer who had the statement recorded. This application appears to be frivolous and is dismissed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
