<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (4) TMI 1466 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283097</link>
    <description>A police case diary remains confidential and cannot be produced by the accused as of right. Section 172 CrPC permits the criminal court to call for and use the diary only for inquiry or trial, and its limited use arises when the police officer uses it to refresh memory or when the court uses it to contradict that officer, subject to the safeguards in Section 145 and Section 161 of the Evidence Act. The diary is not substantive evidence and cannot be used against witnesses other than the investigating officer. On these facts, independent production of diary pages to confront the witness was impermissible, and the order allowing it was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 18:12:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1466 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283097</link>
      <description>A police case diary remains confidential and cannot be produced by the accused as of right. Section 172 CrPC permits the criminal court to call for and use the diary only for inquiry or trial, and its limited use arises when the police officer uses it to refresh memory or when the court uses it to contradict that officer, subject to the safeguards in Section 145 and Section 161 of the Evidence Act. The diary is not substantive evidence and cannot be used against witnesses other than the investigating officer. On these facts, independent production of diary pages to confront the witness was impermissible, and the order allowing it was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283097</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>