Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Overall, the legal framework mandates careful, specific marking of relevant portions of statements under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., emphasizing fairness, transparency, and proper procedure to uphold the integrity of evidence ["Nikhildas Son Of Dasan vs State Of Kerala - Kerala"] ["NIKHILDAS vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"]
Analysis and Conclusion
In Indian criminal trials, plays a pivotal role by allowing Magistrates to record statements or confessions during investigations. However, a common question arises: What are the rules for the marking of 164 statements? Improper handling can jeopardize evidentiary value, leading to appeals or acquittals. This guide explores the legal standards, best practices, and pitfalls, drawing from judicial precedents to help legal professionals, investigators, and accused persons understand the process.
Typically, these statements serve for under , rather than as . Courts emphasize precision to protect the accused's rights and trial fairness. Let's delve into the requirements.
The cornerstone principle is that only admissible, relevant, and specific portions of a Section 164 statement should be extracted and marked separately. Wholesale or of the entire statement is deprecated, as it risks introducing inadmissible content. Markings must use inverted commas for clarity, like , ensuring transparency and compliance with procedural safeguards.
This approach upholds the statement's evidentiary value while respecting the accused's rights. As noted, of the entire statement under S. 161 and 164 Cr.P.C shall not be done. The Presiding Officers shall ensure that only admissible portion... is marked and such portion alone is extracted on a separate sheet and marked and given an exhibit number .
Courts mandate extracting only admissible parts directly into recovery memos or Mahazars, or having the Investigating Officer prove them separately. The practice adopted by the trial Court in marking Section 164 Cr.P.C statement is incorrect. It appears that for the reason of witness accepting his statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, it was marked, which procedure is incorrect . This segmented method avoids tainting proceedings with inadmissible material .
Marking aligns with safeguards under CrPC, scrutinizing if statements were voluntary. Courts examine procedural correctness to prevent coercion influences. In related contexts, statements under Section 164 are under but not ; they're for contradiction .
Proper marking enables robust . Section 164 statements must be made available to the defense . Statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. are equivalent to ... Only for the purpose of contradictions or omissions, statements can be used . If a witness admits or explains discrepancies, further marking may be unnecessary .
Omnibus practices undermine justice. Statement of a witness recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C is a previous statement and can only be confronted in accordance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act and relevant portion should be made part of the deposition . Courts discourage this to maintain integrity .
Additional case law reinforces: Non-marking or faulty marking can lead to acquittals due to investigative lapses . In POCSO cases, proper handling is crucial amid public scrutiny, with calls for further investigation if needed. High Courts must adopt uniform rules for trials, including witness scheduling and evidence management, as per Supreme Court directives on Draft Rules of Criminal Practice, 2021 .
Statements are not signed like Section 161 ones but confronted similarly . Magistrates without jurisdiction can record them, aiding timely victim statements . Bail arguments or contradictions often hinge on these .
Investigators and courts should follow these to avoid reversals. For instance, in complex cases like rape or child offences, precision prevents unmerited acquittals from prosecutorial errors.
Proper marking of Section 164 statements safeguards justice, balancing prosecution needs with accused rights. Generally, focus on specificity, safeguards, and confrontation rules under Evidence Act provisions. This is not legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance.
Key Takeaways:- Mark only relevant, admissible parts .- Shun .- Ensure availability and utility .- Confront per Section 145 Evidence Act .
By adhering to these principles, trials remain robust and fair.
References:1. : Core on separate marking.2. : Availability for .3. , , , etc., for procedural insights.
Note: This article draws solely from cited legal documents for informational purposes.
#Section164CrPC, #LegalMarking, #CourtEvidence
to the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC as well, when such portions of prior statements are used for contradiction or corroboration. ... [(2021) 10 SCC 598], Clause 10 Sub-Clause (v) makes it clear that omnibus marking of the entire statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.PC shall not be done. ... through distinct marking for the purpose of proving those portions by putting it to the person who recorded it. ... Following the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa....
to the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC as well, when such portions of prior statements are used for contradiction or corroboration. ... [(2021) 10 SCC 598], Clause 10 Sub-Clause (v) makes it clear that omnibus marking of the entire statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.PC shall not be done. ... through distinct marking for the purpose of proving those portions by putting it to the person who recorded it. ... Following the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa....
On 20-06-2024 the concerned Court hears on marking of statement of PW-1 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. ... The practice adopted by the trial Court in marking Section 164 CrPC statement is incorrect. ... The learned senior counsel would vehemently contend that marking of a statement rendered by the witness under Section 164 is impermissible in law. ... It appears that inspite of having statements of witnesses recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C., the....
The practice of omnibus marking of S. 164 statement of witness deserves to be deprecated. The relevant portion of such prior statements of living persons used for contradiction or corroboration U/s. 145/157 of the Evidence Act deserves to be marked separately and specifically. ... Marking of contradictions - A healthy practice of marking the contradictions/Omissions properly does not appear to exist in several States. Ideally the relevant portions of case diary statement used for contradicting a witness....
Statements to police not to be signed: Use of statements in evidence. ... Therefore, referring to this, it was submitted that there are contradictions and inconsistencies in the testimony and statements of the prosecution witnesses. In the box, PW1 has stated facts, which are absent in her 164 statement. ... If the witness admits the previous statement or explains the discrepancy or contradiction, it obviously makes it unnecessary for the statement thereafter to be proved by marking it. ... As far as se....
The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. seeking to recall P.Ws.1 to 3 for the purpose of marking their statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., mainly on the ground that statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. are equivalent to ... Only for the purpose of contradictions or omissions, statements can be used. Learned Sessions Judge did not commit any error in dismissing the application. The statements#HL....
An accused is undoubtedly entitled to inspect statements of prosecution witnesses recorded under S. 164, Criminal P.C. Such statements can be used by the prosecution for the purpose of corroborating the witnesses. ... I am clearly of opinion that the learned Magistrate should have directed copies of the statements under S. 164 to be given to the accused on payment by them of the usual fees and in any case, should have allowed the advocate for the defence to inspect those statements." .....
factum of repercussions of the statements under section 164 of CrPC having been explained and recorded in such statements cannot be relied upon to convict the accused persons. ... In the present matter, there is no reasonable ground to reject the statements recorded under Section 164 CrPC and reliance has correctly been placed upon the said statements by the courts below.” ... The entire statements of all the four witnesses are verbatim and on perusal of these #HL_STA....
Alur) and their statements under S.164 CrPC before the J. S. C. M. Adoni there is no other evidence (independent of the above depositions and statements) to show as to whether the depositions in the committing court are false or whether the statements under S.164 CrPC are false. ... Alur) has given mutually contradictory findings in saying in one place that both the depositions and the S.164 CrPC statements are false and in another place by stating that the ....
their statements under S.164 of the Code. ... In the present case, one of the arguments advanced by accused for grant of bail to them was based on the statements of the four appellants recorded by the Magistrate under S.164 of the Code. ... We are unable to draw up a dividing line between witnesses whose statements are liable to be recorded by the Magistrate on being approached for that purpose and those not to be recorded. ... straightaway approach a Magistrate for recording his statement under S.#HL_S....
Statement of a witness recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C is a previous statement and can only be confronted in accordance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act and relevant portion should be made part of the deposition. 6. The practice adopted by the trial Court in marking Section 164 Cr.P.C statement is incorrect. It appears that for the reason of witness accepting his statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C, it was marked, which procedure is incorrect.
The aforesaid rule applicable to recording of the statements under Section 161 shall mutatis mutandis apply to statements recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC, whenever such portions of prior statements of living persons are used for contradiction/corroboration. v. Omnibus marking of the entire statement under S. 161 and 164 Cr.P.C shall not be done. The Presiding Officers shall ensure that only admissible portion of Section 8 or Section 27 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is marked and such portion alone is extracted on a separate sheet and marked and given an exhibit number.
Learned prosecutors vehementally contended that defect in the early part of the investigation and incompetent prosecution shall not confer any undue benefit on the accused when there is substance in the prosecution case. As in the other cases, material evidence was not properly collected at the time of investigation and whatever evidence collected was not presented before the court in a legally acceptable manner. Non-marking of the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. coupled with the failure to contradict the witnesses' previous statements resulted in mis....
The 164 statement recorded by a Magistrate is a public document within the meaning of Section 174 (1) (iii) of the Evidence Act and it is not a substantive piece of evidence. 7. In this case, even though the learned Special Judge has been shown as LW.32 in the list of witnesses, the same has to be eschewed in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court referred supra. The learned Judge need not be examined as a witness for the purpose of marking 164 statement. The statements made under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. are available to the defence for contradicting the witness.
Provided that any confession or statement made under this sub-section may also be recorded by audio-video electronic means in the presence of the advocate of the person accused of an offence: Any Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate may, whether or not he has jurisdiction in the case, record any confession or statement made to him in the course of an investigation under this Chapter or under any other law for the time being in force, or at any time afterwards before the commencement of the inquiry or trial. An Assistant Sessions Judge may pass any sentence authorized by law except ....
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
