Editorials       Cover Story   Letters
 Subscribe Now  Contact Us
Search  
 
Book Reviews
Case Study
Constitution of India
Cover Story
Crime File
Cyber Space
Good Living
Harvard Law School
Health & Fitness
Permanent Imprint Leading
   Cases
Know Your Judge
The Law and The Celebrity
Legal Articles
Legal Events
Law for Other Species
Law School Confidential
Legal Scanner
Legal Trotternama
Media Scan
Potpourri
Reasoning The Reasons
Street Lawyer
Study Abroad
Supreme Court Cases
Thinkers & Theory
Top Law Schools
Universal Law of Success
--------------- Print Magazine --------------
 
  May 2016
 
  April 2016
 
 
 
 
Legal Thesaurus
Lapse dixit

Though the certificate of a person who is declared to be a public analyst can alone be held admissible, there is nothing in the Act to prevent a qualified person from examining the sample and being actually examined in the case and speak to the contents of a certificate issued by him and which can be treated as a contemporaneous document for the purpose of refreshing memory, etc. [ State v. Karson Zaveri , 1960 CrLJ 1582]. That the weight as a piece of evidence to be attached to the written report of a public analyst will depend upon the date of quantitative analysis furnished by the public analyst in his report, and that the mere lapse dixit of the public analyst which cannot be adequately tested must be rejected, has been laid down in Dindayal v. The State , [1956 CrLJ 1031]. This was followed in State v. Shantiram , [1958 CrLJ 8], wherein it was held that the certificate of the public analyst should contain the factual data which the analysis should reveal, and not merely the opinion of the public analyst as to what the date indicates about the nature of the article of food. Otherwise, if the certificate merely gives the final opinion of the public analyst and if such an opinion be held to be conclusive evidence about the nature of the article of food, the merit of the case against the accused will be really decided by the public analyst and not by the court. [ Municipal Council, Kanpur v. Badloo , 1960 CrLJ 1056]. The Punjab High Court had condemned the practice of the analyst, in cases where food is analysed, of merely stating that it is highly adulterated with extraneous vegetable matter. On the other hand, the analyst should indicate what is the extent of the impurity and what the impurity is. [ State v. Shanti Prakash , 1957 CrLJ 390]. The procedure prescribed by the relevant Acts should be strictly adhered to. [ P.P. v. Kuppam , 1960 CrLJ 46]. [Section 45, Evidence Act, 1872].

 
 
LAWYERS UPDATE
(Print Version)
Rs. 600/- per year
(Registered Post & Courier)
     
 

New Releases by UNIVERSAL's

     To avail discounts and for more details write to us at marketing.in@lexisnexis.com

Home     :      About Us     :      Subscribe     :      Advertise With Us    :       Privacy     :      Copyright     :      Feedback     :      Contact Us

Copyright © Universal Book Traders. All material on this site is subject to copyright. All rights reserved.
No part of this material may be reproduced, transmitted, framed or stored in a retrieval system for public or private
use without the written permission of the publisher. This site is developed and maintained by Universal Legal Infosolutions.
Powered by: Universal Book Traders