Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J
SR. SEPHY – Appellant
Versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding sister abhaya's death (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. procedural background of the case (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. claims of inadmissibility of evidence (Para 5 , 6 , 19) |
| 4. court's view on constitutional rights (Para 7 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. court's analysis of scientific tests. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. right against self-incrimination. (Para 12) |
| 7. historical context of legal safeguards. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 8. importance of voluntary consent in evidence. (Para 16) |
| 9. rights against self-incrimination (Para 17 , 18) |
| 10. arguments about narco analysis admissibility (Para 22 , 24) |
| 11. judgment and legal implications (Para 38 , 42) |
| 12. conclusion and impact of the ruling (Para 39 , 41) |
| 13. court's final determination on the validity of evidence. (Para 40) |
| 14. final conclusion and decision. (Para 43 , 45) |
ORDER
The sole petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.8617/2019 and the sole petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.8616/2019 have been initially arrayed as accused 1 and 3 among the three accused in the instant Sessions Case, S.C.No. 1114/2011 on the file of the Court of the Addl. Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (SPE/CBI), Thiruvananthapuram, (“Special Court” for short), in which the offences alleged therein are those punishable un
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
