oral evidence of PW1. The accused is
entitled to take up inconsistent defences. The fact that a different version ... rebut the presumption". It is idle
now to contend that inconsistent defences can be taken up by an accused in
a prosecution under Section
word "inconsistency" has
been defined as hereunder:--
Inconsistency.-- The word 'inconsistency' implies
antagonism, opposition, repugnance.
'Inconsistence' is a word ... Inconsistent' means 'mutually repugnant or
contradictory, contrary, the one implies the
abrogation or abandonment of the other; as, in
speaking of inconsistent defences
repay under Ext.P3 notice.
13. As far as the inconsistencies in the evidence of
PW1 highlighted in the appellate judgment are concerned ... inconsistent, will not adversely affect
the prosecution case. The learned counsel points out that the
accused had come forward with different inconsistent
defences, during
evidence. It is also settled law that the accused can take
inconsistent defences and at the time of evidence he need
only stick
mind that a defendant is entitled to raise
even contradictory and inconsistent defences in
the written statement. As held by Apex Court
corrected and replacing a
contention by amendment is permissible. Even inconsistent defences are
permissible. That apart, adding a new ground of defence, or substituting
mind that a defendant is entitled to raise
even contradictory and inconsistent defences in
the written statement. As held by Apex Court
mind that a defendant is entitled to raise even contradictory and inconsistent defences in the written statement. As held by Apex Court in Modi Spinning
submission made by the
counsel for the defendants that a new case inconsistant with the
previous case canvassed was sought to be introduced under ... inconsistant with his previous case
pleaded in the plaint would severely jeopardise the fair trial of the
case. Whereas the defendants can canvass inconsistant defences
true. Notices were issued to the de facto complainant for
which inconsistent defences were taken. It is submitted that the
petitioner is only the counsel
