M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1965)
criminal ailet beginner real_caseYeh case toh hamesha aayata hai AILET ki prep mein. M. P. Sharma ko kya usne right kiya tha? Is case mein SC ne kaha ki confession ko accept karne ke liye, police ko uss confession ko record karne ki adhikar honi chahiye. M. P. Sharma ne police inquilaab mein jail se confession ki thi. Police ne uska statement record karke, FIR mein daala tha.
Community ki rakha hai ki yeh judgment theek hai. Sabse bada reason yeh hai ki confession ko ek proof ke roop mein use kiya ja sakta hai. Kya aap iske saath agree hain ya disagree?
2 Comments
Maine aapke point ko agree nahi kiya. M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1965) ka case to bolta hai ki unconsented medical treatment ko 'touching' kehte hue allow nahi kiya ja sakta hai. Lekin main samjhta hoon ki is case ka extension karke unconsented medical treatment ko whole defenceless victimon pe apply nahi kiya ja sakta hai, jahaan unka consent hamesha hi nahi mil sakta.
Mera question hai, M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1965) case mein kya hai? Yah case Supreme Court ne banaya tha jahan kuch bhi bina court ki sanad ke karne par abhishap nahin lagaaya gaya tha. Iske jhankhane par abhishap lagaane ka concept Supreme Court ne M. P. Sharma ke case mein badal diya. Koi samajhata hai kyun?