Thanks for conducting these web seminars and putting them online. It greatly helps common person like me to get bits of knowledge about out legal system. Conducting it in English will ensure a wider audience. Thanks once again.
Excellent, my question is, (refer 1 hour 43 minutes) by virtue of CrPC 233(1) and 232, whether an accused can call the Prosecution Witness , for his Defence, even when prosecution omitted that Witnesses from his side. . Waiting for an answer
Yes the prosecution witness who has not been examined by prosecution can be called by defence for their side as their witness ,only thing is that the statement recorded by police during the investigation as per sec.161 of crpc of that witness cannot be used by defence in view of ban of sec.162 of crpc
@@cypatil9147 : But the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghunandan v. State of UP [AIR 1974 SC 463] stated otherwise. Relying on Emperor v. Lal Mian [AIR 19 Cal. 521], Jus. Beg went on to hold that Section 162 does not impair the special powers of the Court under Section 165 of the Evidence Act and going by the sad ruling, the defence could ask the Court to make use of the 161 statement , invoking Section 165 of the Evidence Act. This position is reiterated by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in Dharmarajan v. State of Kerala [2002 (2) KLT 161]. True, it would appear that at what is interdicted by the Parliament in direct terms is done in an indirect manner.
@@premadv1 Respected sir I agree 💯 Thank you Sir v v much . I am very much impressed by your knowledge and Ocean of case laws. You are great Sirji Sir pls kindly watch my video ua-cam.com/video/FiO-nX9ZTJ8/v-deo.html
@@premadv1 Respected Sir 🙏 I have query In corruption case when accused is caught raid handed while accepting bribe that time police has to caught hold the hands of accused to verify whether anthracene powder appears in the hands of accused and check the amount which he has accepted. Sir as soon as police officer caught hold the hands of accused it amounts to arrest as per section 46 of Code of criminal Procedure. So whether guidelines of Arnesh Kumar judgement will still apply , as the punishment under prevention of corruption case is less than 7 years ? Sir pls enlighten us.. Nobody is clarifying this query
Despite I have missed the webinar but still if possible kindly clarify that ....... what is the exact difference between the "Leading question" and "suggestion" and what is the legal provisions/authority for making suggestions ? thank you.
SIR, PLEASE EXPLAIN REAL QUESTION INVOLVED IN THE AMMENDMENT. Provided that in a prosecution for an offence under section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of consent is an issue, it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put questions in the cross-examination of the victim as to the general immoral character, OR PREVIOUS SEXUAL EXPERIENCE , of such victim with any person for proving such consent or the quality of consent. SECTION 146 EVIDENCE ACT
Relevancy tendency to prove fact..chap 2 logical Relevancy chap 5 lol Relevancy 5 ho to proof admissibility how too prove or receivability though relevant it may not be admissible if not stamped promissory not. Unregd
Amazing and holistic enlightment on the topic ! Thanq sir 🎉
Thanks for conducting these web seminars and putting them online. It greatly helps common person like me to get bits of knowledge about out legal system.
Conducting it in English will ensure a wider audience.
Thanks once again.
Wqwqwqwqqwwqqwqwqwwqwqwqwqeqqwqwwqwqwqwqeqrqrqwqrqeqrqeqwqwwqrqeqwqwqrqwweqrqeqeeteewwwwtrqtrqwwwtqqqqrqqqyiwqqrqrqwqqqqrqrqwqw
Wonderful lecture and way of teaching is really very good ...Thanks a lot for enlightening on very important topic
🙏🙏🙏
This type of persons are required in every discussion, I am not able to name that dude, I salute him.
Very useful. All time lecture for trial lawyers of what to do n what not.
D.SOUNDARARAJAN advocate puducherry.
must watch to have a clear understanding , thanks to the host and guest
very very much informative....thank you LETILS and SP Associates
Excellent And Enriching informative lecture And Discussion. Thank you very much.
Great Learning 🙏🏽🙏🙏
Excellent, my question is, (refer 1 hour 43 minutes) by virtue of CrPC 233(1) and 232, whether an accused can call the Prosecution Witness , for his Defence, even when prosecution omitted that Witnesses from his side. . Waiting for an answer
Yes the prosecution witness who has not been examined by prosecution can be called by defence for their side as their witness ,only thing is that the statement recorded by police during the investigation as per sec.161 of crpc of that witness cannot be used by defence in view of ban of sec.162 of crpc
You can refer the answer at around 2:25:00 of this webminer itself
@@cypatil9147 : But the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghunandan v. State of UP [AIR 1974 SC 463] stated otherwise. Relying on Emperor v. Lal Mian [AIR 19 Cal. 521], Jus. Beg went on to hold that Section 162 does not impair the special powers of the Court under Section 165 of the Evidence Act and going by the sad ruling, the defence could ask the Court to make use of the 161 statement , invoking Section 165 of the Evidence Act. This position is reiterated by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in Dharmarajan v. State of Kerala [2002 (2) KLT 161]. True, it would appear that at what is interdicted by the Parliament in direct terms is done in an indirect manner.
@@premadv1
Respected sir
I agree 💯
Thank you Sir v v much .
I am very much impressed by your knowledge and Ocean of case laws.
You are great Sirji
Sir pls kindly watch my video
ua-cam.com/video/FiO-nX9ZTJ8/v-deo.html
@@premadv1
Respected Sir 🙏
I have query
In corruption case when accused is caught raid handed while accepting bribe that time police has to caught hold the hands of accused to verify whether anthracene powder appears in the hands of accused and check the amount which he has accepted. Sir as soon as police officer caught hold the hands of accused it amounts to arrest as per section 46 of Code of criminal Procedure. So whether guidelines of Arnesh Kumar judgement will still apply , as the punishment under prevention of corruption case is less than 7 years ?
Sir pls enlighten us.. Nobody is clarifying this query
Excellent session
Very informative class sir
Despite I have missed the webinar but still if possible kindly clarify that ....... what is the exact difference between the "Leading question" and "suggestion" and what is the legal provisions/authority for making suggestions ? thank you.
I agree sir pls clarify the difference
SIR, PLEASE EXPLAIN REAL QUESTION INVOLVED IN THE AMMENDMENT. Provided that in a prosecution for an offence under section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of consent is an issue, it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put questions in the cross-examination of the victim as to the general immoral character, OR PREVIOUS SEXUAL EXPERIENCE , of such victim with any person for proving such consent or the quality of consent. SECTION 146 EVIDENCE ACT
👍🏻🙏🏻
If not declared hostile he accepts his version. Hostile when demeanor also , does not answer evades ques etc
Sir please show caselaws on screen
1:00:20 😂😂😂
Relevancy tendency to prove fact..chap 2 logical Relevancy chap 5 lol Relevancy 5 ho to proof admissibility how too prove or receivability though relevant it may not be admissible if not stamped promissory not. Unregd
S.156 non relevant facts admissible