Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C - Statement recorded by Magistrate u/s 164 Cr.P.C is not a substantive evidence but corroborative in nature and such statement can only be used either to corroborate or to contradict evidence adduced by witness during trial of a case...........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164, 154 -- Statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C - Stands on much superior pedestal in comparison to information which formed the basis for S.154 Cr.P.C...........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 35 -- Statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C made in course of investigation - Cannot be considered as evidence recorded u/s 35 of POCSO Act...........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C - If witness resiles from his statement given by him u/s 164 Cr.P.C in trial Court, witness can be cross-examined by person, who calls him and trial Court may permit for putting any question on his earlier statement, which might be put in cross-examination by adverse party in terms of S.154 of Evidence..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement of PW16 u/s 164 Cr.P.C - Rape and murder of 13 years old girl - PW16 resiled from his statement made u/s 164 Cr.P.C while deposing before Court - Prosecution was permitted to cross-examine him - PW16 stated in his cross-examination that his statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C was given under threat and coercion - Prosecution did..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement of victim u/s 164 Cr.P.C - Rape case - Statement of victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C as substantive evidence in chief - This is absolutely in contravention of scope of evidentiary value of a statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C and against principles of examination, cross-examination and re-examination of witness under Evidence Act..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C - Statement made by a witness before Magistrate authorized to tender oath is not a substantive piece of evidence and it has to be taken only as a previous statement - It can be used both for corroboration and contradiction - It can corroborate maker or deponent if he is examined as a witness - Such..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. - Summoning of judicial officer to prove voluntariness of statement - Not permissible...........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 74 -- Statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. - Such statement is a public document - It does not require any formal proof by summoning Magistrate to prove the same...........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 164 -- Statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C - It is exclusive domain of I.O alone to move an application for getting statement recorded of any witness u/s 164 Cr.P.C - On moving such an application, Magistrate will have to get statement recorded...........
