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

BUDDHADASA v. MAHENDRAN


BUDDHADASA, V. A. MAHENDRAN

1956 Present: Weerasooriya, J., and H. N. G. Fernando, J.

BUDDHADASA, Petitioner, and A. MAHENDRAN (Officer-in-Charge, Police Station, Matara), Respondent

S. C. 315-Application for a Writ of Mandamus

Information Book-Statements of persons recorded therein-Their evidentiary value in civil proceedings-Sight of a litigant to obtain copies of them-" Public documents "-" Right to inspect "-Proof of Public Documents Ordinance, s. 3- Evidence Ordinance, ss. 74, 76,100-Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 121 (1), 122- Mandamus.

A party to an action is not entitled to resort to section 3 of the Proof of Public Documents Ordinance in order to obtain certified copies of statements taken down in an Information Book in terms of sections 121 (1) and 122 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code unless he can show that at the trial of the action it will be necessary for him to adduce proof of the contents of those statements.

A statement reduced into writing by a police officer in terms of section 122 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code is not a statement of the witness, a record of which it purports to be, but is the statement of the police officer as to

















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