LANDMARK CASE
Tahsildar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
AIR 1959 SC 1012 · Supreme Court of India · Evidence
At a glance
- Citation: AIR 1959 SC 1012
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Evidence
- In one line: Only omissions that amount to contradictions can be used, in the manner the law allows.
1 Facts
The defence wanted to use omissions in witnesses' police statements to contradict them.
2 Issue
Can omissions in police statements be used to contradict?
3 What the court decided
Only omissions that amount to contradictions can be used, in the manner the law allows.
4 Why it matters
The classic case on using police statements in cross.
5 Think about it
When does an omission become a contradiction?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Evidence
- Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473
- Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1
- Bipin Shantilal Panchal v. State of Gujarat (2001) 3 SCC 1
- Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor AIR 1939 PC 47
- Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 801
- State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad AIR 1961 SC 1808
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of IndiaTarsem Singh v. Sukhminder Singh →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.