List of cases

Section 6
1. R vs. Bedingfield
2. Rattan vs. Reginam
Section 8
1. R vs. Palmer
2. Queen Express vs Abdullah
Abdullah was prosecuted for the murder of a young girl, Dulari. She was
attacked while asleep in her home. But there was sufficient light to enable
her to identify her assailant. She was taken to police station and from there
she was taken to hospital. As her throat was cut she could not speak. But
she answered to the questions by negative or affirmative signs of her hand.
The Magistrate mentioned many names and when the name of Abdullah was
mentioned she made an affirmative sign. The question before the court was
whether the affirmative signs of the hand the deceased made in response to
the questions put to her were relevant under section 8 as conduct of an
injured person or under section 32 as dying declaration. The court held that
it is relevant under section 32 as the conduct under section 8 must be
influenced directly by the facts and not by the interposition of words spoken
by third persons. Here the signs of the hands were not influenced by the
facts but by the question put to the deceased.
Section 10
1. R vs. Blake and Tye
Blake was working as a landing waiter at the Customs House. Tye worked
at the same place as an agent for the importers. They were charged with
conspiracy to dodge the customs by passing goods without paying full
duty. Tye made certain enteries in two books. One of them was used for
carrying out fraud and entries were necessary for that purpose. But the
other was for his private record, or convenience, such as, the counterfoil
of his cheque book. It was held that the entries in the former book were
admissible against Blake but the latter were not.
2. Mirza Akbar vs. Emperor
Section 11
1. Dudh Nath Pandey vs. State of UP
SC stated that plea of alibi postulates the physical
impossibility of the presence of the
accused at the scene of the
offence by reason of his presence at another place. The plea can succeed only if it is

shown that the accused was so far away at the relevant time that he could not be
present at the place where the crime was committed. Applying this to the facts of
the case the court held that the plea of alibi was not established as the gap
between the factory where the accused worked and where he was present at 8.30 a.
m. and the place where the accused worked and the place of murder which took
place at 9a.m. was so short that the accused could have easily reached there.
Section 14
1. Reg vs Prabhudas
2. Emperor vs. Haji Sher Mohammad