web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: CrPC 315 – Accused person to be competent witness

CrPC 315 – Accused person to be competent witness

Posted on July 13, 2021 by ShadesOfKnife

(1) Any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court shall be a competent witness for the defence and may give evidence on oath in disproof of the charges made against him or any person charged together with him at the same trial:
Provided that—
(a) he shall not be called as a witness except on his own request in writing;
(b) his failure to give evidence shall not be made the subject of any comment by any of the parties or the Court or give rise to any presumption against himself or any person charged together with him that the same trial.
(2) Any person against whom proceedings are instituted in any Criminal Court under section 98, or section 107 or section 108, or section 109, or section 110, or under Chapter IX or under Part B, Part C or Part D of Chapter X, may offer himself as a witness in such proceedings:
Provided that in proceedings under section 108, section 109, or section 110, the failure of such person to give evidence shall not be made the subject of any comment by any of the parties or the Court or give rise to any presumption against him or any other person proceeded against together with him at the same inquiry.

Posted in Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments | Tagged CrPC 315 - Accused person to be competent witness | Leave a comment

Shyam Manohar Saxena Vs CBI and Ors on 1 Jul 2019

Posted on July 13, 2021 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge bench of Delhi High Court found the Trial Court to be erring in not allowing a 91 CrPC petition sought by the accused citing wrong reasons. Each of such error is clearly called out and hung to dry.

From Para 30,

25. The reasoning given by the Trial Court that specific particulars or dates of meetings have not been given is ex-facie unsubstantiated. The list of documents, as extracted hereinabove, clearly shows that the petitioner has given requisite particulars so as to identify the relevant documents. It may further be noticed that subject application was filed along with an application under Section 315 Cr.P.C filed by the petitioner as well as the other co-accused. Applications under Section 315 Cr.P.C. of the accused were allowed and accused were permitted to examine themselves as witnesses.
26. Under Section 243 Cr.P.C. it is obligatory on the part of the Trial Court to issue process when the accused seeks summoning of any witness or production of any document in his defence. The only ground on which such an application can be refused is if the same was vexatious, delayed or would defeat the ends of justice.
27. In the instant case, no such findings have been returned by the Trial Court. On the contrary, the Trial Court has erred in not noticing that the petitioner had moved an application even at the stage when prosecution evidence was being led and was permitted to withdraw that application with liberty to move an appropriate application at the stage of defence evidence and that is exactly what the petitioner has done.
28. Further, the Trial Court has clearly erred in holding that it is within the discretion of the court, under Section 243 Cr.P.C. to decline such an application. On the contrary, as per section 243 Cr.P.C., it is obligatory on the part of the Trial Court to issue process, unless, it for the reasons to be recorded, holds that the application is vexatious, delayed or defeats the ends of justice.
29. Further reasoning given by the Trial Court, that the petitioner is seeking re-summoning of the witnesses, who have already been examined, is also not correct. Petitioner has not sought summoning of the witnesses, who have already been examined as prosecution witnesses for re-examination/cross-examination. Petitioner has merely sought production of the relevant record of the association from the custodian thereof. Admittedly, the record would come from an undisputed source. Petitioner has not sought re-summoning of any witness already examined, by name but has only sought production of the documents from the custodian thereof. Once the documents are produced, it would be open to the petitioner to prove the same in accordance with the Evidence Act.
30. Further reasoning given by the Trial Court, that the petitioner could have obtained copies of the documents under the Right to Information Act and then cross-examined the witnesses on the said documents, is also erroneous. Even if a person were to obtain copies of the documents under the Right to Information Act, said copies would not become primary evidence in terms of the Evidence Act and a party would still need to summon the original record from the custodian thereof.

Shyam Manohar Saxena Vs CBI and Ors on 1 Jul 2019

Citations : [2019 SCC ONLINE DEL 8961]

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/197449956/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5d1a4325714d580311101c19

https://www.indianemployees.com/judgments/details/shyam-manohar-saxena-versus-central-bureau-of-investigation-ors

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged CrPC 243 - Evidence for defence CrPC 311 - Power to summon material witness or examine person present CrPC 315 - Accused person to be competent witness CrPC 91 - Summons to produce document or other thing Shyam Manohar Saxena Vs CBI and Ors | Leave a comment

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal X Timeline

Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Follow

AP High Court Advocate with M Tech (CS) || 12 years in 'Software Industry' as Solution Architect || Blogs at https://t.co/29CB9BzK4w || #TDPTwitter

SandeepPamarati
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
gvk_india GVK...... @gvk_india ·
17h

చిన్న దొరా...
మనుషుల్ని, వాళ్ళ క్యారెక్టర్ ని మీ అవసరాలకి అనుగుణంగా మార్చుకోవడం, వాడుకోవడంలో మిమ్మల్ని కొట్టేవాడే లేడు...
అసలు జగ్గప్పతో సావాసం చేయడం ఎందుకు...?
తన ప్రాపకం కోసం తనకి ఇష్టం లేనోళ్ళ మీద మీరూ అయిష్టం పెంచుకోని అదుపుతప్పి మాట్లాడడం ఎందుకు...? ఇప్పుడు మాటల్తో మిమ్మల్ని…

Reply on Twitter 1946187158622282066 Retweet on Twitter 1946187158622282066 53 Like on Twitter 1946187158622282066 102 X 1946187158622282066
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
gbou_offl Global Box Office @gbou_offl ·
16h

ఆంధ్రా ప్రదేశ్ లో అత్యుత్తమ రాజకీయ నాయకుడు ఎవరు ?

🔁 @ncbn ❤️ #YSR

2

Reply on Twitter 1946197710371196956 Retweet on Twitter 1946197710371196956 145 Like on Twitter 1946197710371196956 1356 X 1946197710371196956
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
rkgarimella ramakrishna @rkgarimella ·
14 Jul

.@MSRajuTDPOffl @BbcN9966 @bbcnewstelugu @AmbicaOfficial @etvandhraprades @appugog @xpressandhra @iTDPAnanthapur @Cbnarmyvizag @JaiTDP @Dr_nelavalaMLA @naralokesh @kpsarathyTDP @RKarimilli @AraniiSrinivas @chandujanyat @Telugodu1982 @YSRCParty @cbn_updates1 @umasudhir @ds

Reply on Twitter 1944792946295095786 Retweet on Twitter 1944792946295095786 3 Like on Twitter 1944792946295095786 3 X 1944792946295095786
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
rkgarimella ramakrishna @rkgarimella ·
15 Jul

.@bbcnewstelugu @indialegalmedia @Luthra_Sidharth @AmbicaOfficial @barandbench @LiveLawIndia @GvNarasaiah @IndianLawyers_ @ZeeTeluguLive @ravivallabha @dileep_paturu @VasBytes @Telugodu1982 @tatinenis @i_itdp @DSGRAJU1 @being_dsb @Indraneel_Adv @advocate_ap @ImYanamala @KazaVk

Reply on Twitter 1945022202992095482 Retweet on Twitter 1945022202992095482 4 Like on Twitter 1945022202992095482 4 X 1945022202992095482
Load More

Recent Posts

  • Ekta Kapur Vs Kunal Kapur on 21 May 2025 July 15, 2025
  • Dudekula Khasim Vs State of Andhra Pradesh on 24 Mar 2020 July 14, 2025
  • Evidence Act Sec 65 – Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given July 14, 2025
  • State of AP Vs Matham Vijaya Rao and Anr on 07 Jul 2025 July 14, 2025
  • Dowry Prohibition Officers of Andhra Pradesh working? July 13, 2025

Most Read Posts

  • Vishal Shah Vs Monalisha Gupta and Ors on 20 Feb 2025 (3,064 views)
  • Mudireddy Divya Vs Sulkti Sivarama Reddy on 26 Mar 2025 (2,492 views)
  • Sukhdev Singh Vs Sukhbir Kaur on 12 Feb 2025 (2,468 views)
  • Madan Kumar Satpathy Vs Priyadarshini Pati on 07 Feb 2025 (1,879 views)
  • Megha Khetrapal Vs Rajat Kapoor on 19 Mar 2025 (1,744 views)
  • Om Prakash Ambadkar Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors on 16 Jan 2025 (1,428 views)
  • Ivan Rathinam Vs Milan Joseph on 28 Jan 2025 (1,213 views)
  • Saikat Das Vs State of West Bengal and Anr on 27 Mar 2025 (1,063 views)
  • Akkala Rami Reddy Vs State of AP and Anr on 30 Apr 2025 (1,017 views)
  • Roopa Soni Vs Kamal Narayan Soni on 06 Sep 2023 (879 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (405)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (376)Landmark Case (370)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (367)1-Judge Bench Decision (296)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (275)Work-In-Progress Article (216)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (97)Sandeep Pamarati (93)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (77)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (68)Perjury Under 340 CrPC (61)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (58)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (44)HM Act 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Legal Terrorism (41)Not Authentic copy hence to be replaced (40)CrPC 482 - Quash (39)Divorce granted on Cruelty ground (39)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (719)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (320)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (180)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (141)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (107)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (86)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (66)General Study Material (55)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (50)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (50)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (50)Prakasam DV Cases (46)LLB Study Material (46)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (44)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (43)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (39)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (36)High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (28)High Court of Telangana Judgment or Order or Notification (26)High Court of Calcutta Judgment or Order or Notification (23)

Recent Comments

  • ShadesOfKnife on PIL – Dowry Givers should be prosecuted (Veerabhadra Rao Pamarathi and Anr Vs UOI and Ors)
  • सुमन सेठ on PIL – Dowry Givers should be prosecuted (Veerabhadra Rao Pamarathi and Anr Vs UOI and Ors)
  • Risha Bhatnagar on Pitchika Lakshmi Vs Pichika Chenna Mallikaharjuana Rao on 24 Dec 2012
  • ShadesOfKnife on Index of all Summary Case Law Pages on Shades of Knife
  • kanwal Kishore Girdhar on Index of all Summary Case Law Pages on Shades of Knife

Archives of SoK

  • July 2025 (6)
  • June 2025 (15)
  • May 2025 (3)
  • April 2025 (10)
  • March 2025 (7)
  • February 2025 (8)
  • January 2025 (1)
  • December 2024 (3)
  • November 2024 (4)
  • October 2024 (16)
  • September 2024 (15)
  • August 2024 (14)
  • July 2024 (11)
  • June 2024 (18)
  • May 2024 (13)
  • April 2024 (9)
  • March 2024 (23)
  • February 2024 (15)
  • January 2024 (11)
  • December 2023 (11)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (18)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Unitedmen Foundation a dedicated community forged with the mission to unite men facing legal challenges in marital disputes. 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Vinayak my2centsworth – This blog is for honest law abiding men, married or planning to get married 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS Cloudflare Status

  • NRT (Tokyo) on 2025-07-24 July 24, 2025
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jul 24, 17:00 - 21:00 UTCJul 16, 02:26 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in NRT (Tokyo) datacenter on 2025-07-24 between 17:00 and 21:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for end-users […]
  • SEA (Seattle) on 2025-07-23 July 23, 2025
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jul 23, 08:30 UTC  -  Jul 24, 13:00 UTCJul 18, 19:02 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in SEA (Seattle) datacenter between 2025-07-23 08:30 and 2025-07-24 13:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance […]
  • BNA (Nashville) on 2025-07-22 July 22, 2025
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jul 22, 15:00 - 23:00 UTCJul 18, 18:16 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in BNA (Nashville) datacenter on 2025-07-22 between 15:00 and 23:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for end-users […]

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 112.194.89.24 | SD July 18, 2025
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 67 | First: 2018-11-08 | Last: 2025-07-18
  • 20.253.155.235 | S July 18, 2025
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 3 | First: 2024-11-12 | Last: 2025-07-18
  • 217.12.123.3 | SD July 18, 2025
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 5,805 | First: 2017-01-10 | Last: 2025-07-18
Owned and Operated by Advocate Sandeep Pamarati
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 1634 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel