Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments



                                8 of 29

                                  Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:131913-DB




CRA-D-1136-2022 (O&M)                -9-

20. During the course of his cross-examination by the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, no elicitations became unearthed from the said witness, wherebys it could be firmly stated, that the resilings made by the witness (supra) were ill made resilings from his previously made statement Ex. PW-7/A.

21. Be that as it may, the prime reason for discounting the exculpatory deposition, as made by PW-7, is grounded in the factum, that though the other eye witness to the occurrence PW-6, and, who is also the complainant-informant, has resiled from his previously made statement in writing to the police. However, when for reasons (supra), this Court has declared the said resilings to be not worthy of acceptance. In consequence, since the previous signatured statement made by PW-6, thus underwhelming the unsigned previous signatured statement made by PW-7. Resultantly, the resilings, as made by PW-7 from his previously made statement to the police officer concerned, thus become inconsequential, and/or therebys has no exculpatory effect.