Judgments - Murder
R.RACHAIAH Vs. HOME SECRETARY, BANGALORE
The bare reading of Section 216 reveals that though it is permissible for any Court to alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced, certain safeguards, looking into the interest of the accused person who is charged with the additional charge or with the alteration of the additional charge, are also provided specifically under sub-sections (3) and 4 of Section 216 of the Code. Sub-section(3), in no Full Judgment
HARIJAN BHALA TEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
CHAMAN & ANR. Vs. STATE OF UTTRAKHAND
SHEIKH SINTHA MADHAR @ JAFFER @ SINTHA Vs. STATE REP.BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
AMANULLAH & ANR. Vs. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
AMANULLAH & ANR. Vs. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
PAWAN @ RAM SALA @ CHANDA V/s STATE (GOVT OF NCT)
GYANESHWAR SHYAMAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
STATE OF M.P. Vs. GOLOO RAIKWAR & ANR.
SHAHID KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
GAJANAN DASHRATH KHARATE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
SADHU SARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P. & ORS.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SYED UMAR SAYED ABBAS & ORS
B. VIRUPAKSHAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS
BHARAMAPPA GOGI Vs. PRAVEEN MURTHY & ORS. ETC.
GULZARI LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
NOORAHAMMAD AND ORS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
STATE OF ASSAM Vs. RAMEN DOWARAH
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. HEMANT KAWADU CHAURIWAL ETC
It is a settled law that dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction and it does not require any corroboration. But it is equally true that dying declaration goes against the cardinal principle of law that 'evidence must be direct'. Thus, dying declaration must be judged and appreciated in light of the surrounding circumstances Full Judgment