Skip to content


Govindlal Bhikhabhai Vs. State of Gujarat - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1966CriLJ830
AppellantGovindlal Bhikhabhai
RespondentState of Gujarat
Excerpt:
- .....treated as a bet the words can be explained by resort to section 49 of the indian evidence act by giving opinion of the persons having means of knowledge. the opinion would be relevant if the person giving that opinion has special means of knowledge. therefore, before opinion becomes relevant, it must be shown to the courts that the person who gave the opinion, gave the opinion by special means of knowledge. this has not been done in this case. the opinion would not, therefore, be relevant. it is not for the defence to put question to show that the witness has no special means of knowledge. the opinion would be relevant only if the person giving opinion has special means, of knowledge. therefore, the prosecution has to prove that the person has special means of knowledge before it.....
Judgment:

V.B. Raju, J.

1. This is an appeal against the conviction under Section 12(a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act. According to the prosecution the accused No. 1 gave Re. 1/- saying the words 'Bombay seven'. The words 'Bombay seven' have got to be explained before the words can be treated as a bet The words can be explained by resort to Section 49 of the Indian Evidence Act by giving opinion of the persons having means of knowledge. The opinion would be relevant if the person giving that opinion has special means of knowledge. Therefore, before opinion becomes relevant, it must be shown to the Courts that the person who gave the opinion, gave the opinion by special means of knowledge. This has not been done in this case. The opinion would not, therefore, be relevant. It is not for the defence to put question to show that the witness has no special means of knowledge. The opinion would be relevant only if the person giving opinion has special means, of knowledge. Therefore, the prosecution has to prove that the person has special means of knowledge before it adduces the opinion evidence and in order to make the opinion evidence relevant under Section 49. This has not been done. This appeal is, therefore, allowed and the conviction and sentences are set aside.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //