In which one among the following cases the Supreme Court of India said that 'it is not an absolute rule of law that dying declaration must be corroborated by other evidence before it can be acted upon'?
A. Sharad Birdhichand Sharda v. State of Maharashtra
B. Pakala Narayan Swami v. King Emperor
C. Kaushal Rao v. State of Bombay
D. Harjit Kaur v. State of Punjab
Answer: Option A
Join The Discussion
Comments ( 1 )
Which section of the Indian Evidence Act protects communication during marriage?
A. Section 122
B. Section 123
C. Section 124
D. Section 125
A. Of 'B', because 'B' is a merchant in Delhi. 'A' has written many letters addressed to 'B'
B. Of 'C' because 'C' is a clerk of 'A' 'C's duty was to examineand file A's correspondence
C. Of 'D' because 'D' is Z's broker to whom Z habitually submitted the letters purporting to Bwritten by 'A' for the purpose of his advice
D. Of all the above
A. Section 120
B. Section 126
C. Section 123
D. Section 98
A. That relates to only the place of occurrence
B. That relates to nature of the object
C. That relates to the past user of the object
D. Information given by the accused, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered
Kushal Rao vs. State of Bombay is the correct answer.