http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 6
PETITIONER: BHOGILAL CHUNILAL PANDYA
Vs.
RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF BOMBAY
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/11/1958
BENCH: WANCHOO, K.N. BENCH: WANCHOO, K.N. BHAGWATI, NATWARLAL H. SUBBARAO, K.
CITATION: 1959 AIR 356 1959 SCR Supl. (1) 310 CITATOR INFO : F 1966 SC 40 (5)
ACT: Evidence-Notes of attendance prepared by Solicitor- Admissibility of for corroborating Solicitor --statement if communication to another necessary for admissibility Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 Of 1872) s. 157.
HEADNOTE: The appellant, a cashier of a Company, was charged with committing criminal breach of trust. When the defalcation was discovered certain conversations took place between the Chairman and Secretary of the Company and the appellant in the presence of a Solicitor. Soon afterwards, the Solicitor prepared notes of attendance of these conversations. At the trial these notes were produced to corroborate the testimony of the Solicitor. The appellant objected that these notes were not admissible under s. 157 of the Evidence Act. He contended that the word " statement " in s. 157 required the communication of the statement by the maker to another person and that it did not include any writing or memorandum made by a person for his own use when it was not communicated to another person. 311 Held, that the notes of attendance were admissibl...