Law
Cite|
|
LawCite Search |
LawCite Markup Tool |
Help |
Feedback
Law Cite |
| Case Name | Citation(s) † | Court | Jurisdiction | Date | Full Text | Citation Index | |
| [1980] CRC 851--126 |
|
Canada | circa 1980 |
|
 1 |
||
| Nagpur Amdumiyan Guljar Patel v Emperor (FB) (Niyogi, A J G) |
|
Australia | circa 1937 |
|
1 |
||
| [1926] Lah 272 |
|
Pakistan | circa 1926 |
|
1 |
||
| [1925] Gal 872 |
|
United States | circa 1925 |
|
1 |
||
| [1920] Nag 255 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
2 |
||
| Yeluchuri Venkatachennaya v Emperor |
[1920] AllINRprMad 141; |
All India Reporter - Madras | India - Tamil Nadu | 20 Feb 1920 | AsianLII |
|
6 |
| [1919] Gal 1021 |
|
United States | circa 1919 |
|
1 |
||
| [1900] Awn 192 |
|
India - Uttar Pradesh | circa 1900 |
|
1 |
||
| (1900) 27 Cal 139 |
|
United States - California | circa 1900 |
|
4 |
||
| (1899) 22 Mad 491 |
|
India | circa 1899 |
|
3 |
||
| [1895] Awn 111 |
|
India - Uttar Pradesh | circa 1895 |
|
1 |
||
| (1885) 10 Bom 190 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1885 |
|
2 |
||
| 166 IC 582 |
|
United Kingdom | circa 1920 |
|
2 |
||
| 73 IC 815 |
|
United Kingdom |
|
1 |
|||
| 59 Bom 35519 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 54 Cal 5222 |
|
United States - California |
|
1 |
|||
| 52 Gal 595 |
|
United States |
|
1 |
|||
| 52 Cal 59530 |
|
United States - California | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 50 Bom 74117 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 47 Cal 15433 |
|
United States - California | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 45 Cal 72021 |
|
United States - California | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 45 Cal 720 |
|
United States - California | circa 1920 |
|
7 |
||
| 43 Mad 51114 |
|
India | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| Expl and Dist ] |
|
India | circa 1920 |
|
4 |
||
| 38 Cal 446 |
|
United States - California | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 35 CWN 49027 |
|
India | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 27 Cal 13929 |
|
United States - California | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 25 Bom 42212 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 23 Mad 151 |
|
India | circa 1920 |
|
6 |
||
| 23 Bom 213 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
6 |
||
| 22 Mad 49126 |
|
India | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 22 Bom LR 1001 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| Queen-Empress v Pahuji |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
3 |
||
| 17 Allin 16 |
|
United States - Pennsylvania | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 16 NLR 91 |
|
Sri Lanka | circa 1920 |
|
4 |
||
| 16 NLR 9 |
|
Sri Lanka |
|
2 |
|||
| 16 Bom 66113 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| Venkatasami v Queen |
|
India | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 6 Lah 17610 |
|
Pakistan | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 3 Lah 431 |
|
Pakistan | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| 2 P 81 |
|
circa 1920 |
7 |
||||
| 2 P 23 |
|
circa 1920 |
7 |
||||
| 1 P 22 |
|
circa 1920 |
5 |
||||
| 1 Bom 610 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
3 |
||
| Air 1935 Rang 135 |
|
Myanmar | circa 1935 |
|
1 |
||
| Air 1932 Nag 117 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1932 |
|
2 |
||
| Muhammad Iusuf v Emperor |
|
India - West Bengal | circa 1931 |
|
3 |
||
| Air 1930 Sind 211 |
|
Pakistan | circa 1930 |
|
1 |
||
| Air 1928 Rang 25 |
|
Myanmar | circa 1928 |
|
2 |
||
| Air 1927 Nag 286 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1927 |
|
2 |
||
| Gallagher v Emperor |
|
India - West Bengal | circa 1927 |
|
1 |
||
| AIR 1926 Lahore 272 |
|
India - Punjab | circa 1926 |
|
1 |
||
| Air 1926 Bom 551 |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1926 |
|
2 |
||
| Fakhruddin v Emperor |
|
India - Punjab | circa 1925 |
|
1 |
||
| Air 1925 Cal 872 |
|
India - West Bengal | circa 1925 |
|
1 |
||
| AIR 1923 Lahore 666 |
|
India - Punjab | circa 1923 |
|
1 |
||
| Pir Bakush v Emperor |
|
India - Punjab | circa 1923 |
|
1 |
||
| Sher Muhammad v Emperor |
|
India - Punjab | circa 1923 |
|
1 |
||
| Govinda v Emperor |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
||
| Evidence Act Maroti, 'Hanya, two of the three Tulsi- Entries in the Village Crime Note Book rams, Gaotia, Dasria, Jhibal and Dhondya are therefore admissible to prove that From the above I conclude that there was certain crimes were reported and registered, ample evidence for the conclusion that a but, of course, they are no proof against gang was in operation, whose object was persons named as suspects in them From the commission of thefts in or near this the above discussion it will be seen that police station area there is good proof of the commission of The prosecution has led evidence about these crimes The next point is whether 19 registered and two unregistered cases the various articles recovered have been of house-breaking of the Tirora station properly identified, and secondly, whether house of dates between 1921 and 1933 it was legal to draw inferences against for which this gang is said to be responsi the accused because of their possession of ble A table giving particulars and show these articles For the appellants it is ing articles recovered and connected with urged that they are mostly articles of egLch case has been given in para 16 of the common daily use and the offences with judgment under appeal while cases have which they are to be connected are none been discussed individually in paras 17 of them more recent than three years : to 41 It is argued that the commission after such a lapse of time the identifica of some of these offences has not been tions are doubtful and no presumption properly proved as entries from the village under S 114, Evidence Act, properly arises, Crime Note Book are inadmissible, and so that the accused should not have been in one case the first information report asked to explain possession, and even if was not proved although it was an exhibit it was allowable to ask them, then they in another case I have checked the proof have given some sort of explanation which given for the existence of these offences, should be accepted On the other hand, with the | India - West Bengal | circa 1920 |
|
1 |
|||
| Dattatraya v Pundlik |
|
India - Maharashtra | circa 1920 |
|
2 |
||
| Air 1914 Mad 45 |
|
India - Tamil Nadu | circa 1914 |
|
1 |