Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: DESIGN defect in Dharmendra Kumar Tandon vs State on 12 September, 2019Matching Fragments
11), Dhanaj Singh alias Shera & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab reported at (2004) 3 SCC 654 (paragraphs 5 and 8), State of UP v Krishna Master, reported at (2010) 12 SCC 324 (paragraph 15)."
(emphasis supplied)
49. The Supreme Court in Ram Bali vs. State of U.P., (2004) 10 SCC 598 has also held as under:-
"12. The investigation was also stated to be defective since the gun was not sent for forensic test. In the case of a defective investigation the court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence. But it would not be right in acquitting an accused person solely on account of the defect; to do so would tantamount to playing into the hands of the investigating officer if the investigation is designedly defective. (See Karnel Singh v. State of M.P. [(1995) 5 SCC 518 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 977])