NDLI: Venkatesh @ Chandra & Anr. Etc Vs. State of Karnataka

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Evidence Act 1872: s.27 – Settled Legal Position –
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Evidence Act, 1872: s.27 – Settled Legal Position – Going by the parameters of s.27 of the Evidence Act, only so much of information which relates distinctly to the facts thereby discovered can be stated to have been proved – Only that part of the statement which leads to the discovery of certain facts alone could be marked in evidence and not the entire of the statement – All the earlier facts narrated in the statement about past history which are in the nature of self-implication, would be inadmissible as amounting to a confession made to a police officer. Practice and Procedure: The Prosecuting Agency should u/ s.27 of Evidence Act, 1872 record only that part of the statement which leads to the discovery of fact – The practice of putting the confession of the accused made to the police officer which is otherwise hit by the principles of Evidence Act must immediately be stopped as such kind of statements may have a direct tendency to influence and prejudice the mind of the Court. Evidence: Circumstantial Evidence – Legal Position – The circumstances on the basis of which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn, must be fully established and the circumstances forming the chain of evidence must be so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and should rule out every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved by the prosecution. Media Trial: Consequences and Limitations – All matters relating to the crime and whether a particular thing happens to be a conclusive piece of evidence must be dealt with by a Court of Law and not through a TV channel – If at all there was a voluntary statement, the matter would be dealt with by the Court of Law – The public platform is not a place for such debate or proof of what otherwise is the exclusive domain and function of Courts of law – Any such debate or discussion touching upon matters which are in the domain of Courts would amount to direct interference in administration of criminal justice. Criminal law: Approach of Court in considering the involvement of accused in other crime – Distinction, during bail and trial proceedings – Approach at different stages including the stage of considering the bail application are qualitatively different – At the stage of consideration of bail, the primary concern is to weigh in balance the liberty of an accused and the possible prejudice that may get visited upon the societal interest in case he is released and therefore it would be apt and proper to consider his involvement in other crimes – But at the stage of final assessment whether conviction be recorded or not, the matter must be considered purely on its merits unless the very membership of a gang or a group or an outfit itself can amount to an offence or as an aggravated form of an offence – At the stage of sentencing, his involvement in other crimes may be a relevant factor provided the concerned material in the form of concluded judgments in the other matters are brought on record in a manner known to law – The established involvement in other matters would then certainly be relevant while dealing with the question whether the concerned accused is required to be dealt with sternly or leniently.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 1302
Petitioner	Venkatesh @ Chandra & Anr. Etc
Respondent	State Of Karnataka
SCR	[2022] 4 S.C.R. 556
Judgement Date	2022-04-19
Case Number	1476-1477

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Venkatesh @ Chandra & Anr. Etc Vs. State of Karnataka

Please Log-in to view this content

State of Karnataka Vs. David Razario and Anr.

State of Gujarat Vs. Vinaya Chandra Chhota Lal Patni

Hari Nath and Anr. Etc. Vs. State of U.p.

State of U.p. Vs. Veerpal & Anr.

State of Karnataka Vs. Shariff

Jaffer Hussein Dastgir Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ramilaben Hasmukhbhai Khristi and Anr. Etc. Vs. State of Gujarat.

Guljar Ali Etc. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Hanumantappa Bhimappa Dalavai & Anr Vs. State of Karnataka

Venkatesh @ Chandra & Anr. Etc Vs. State of Karnataka

Venkatesh @ Chandra & Anr. Etc Vs. State of Karnataka

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of Karnataka Vs. David Razario and Anr.

State of Gujarat Vs. Vinaya Chandra Chhota Lal Patni

Hari Nath and Anr. Etc. Vs. State of U.p.

State of U.p. Vs. Veerpal & Anr.

State of Karnataka Vs. Shariff

Jaffer Hussein Dastgir Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ramilaben Hasmukhbhai Khristi and Anr. Etc. Vs. State of Gujarat.

Guljar Ali Etc. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Hanumantappa Bhimappa Dalavai & Anr Vs. State of Karnataka

Venkatesh @ Chandra & Anr. Etc Vs. State of Karnataka