upon and such lapses ignored.
Noticing the possibility of investigation being designedly defective, this
Court in the case of Dhanaj Singh @ Shera ... into the hands of the investigating officer if
the investigation is designedly defective.”
23. Dealing with the cases of omission and commission, the Court
into the hands of the Investigating Officer if the investigation is designedly defective.
32. In Dhanaj Singh alias Shera and Ors. v. State of Punjab ... playing into the hands of the Investigating Officer if the investigation designedly defective.
33. It has been held in Chhotu v. State of Maharashtra
State Of Uttarakhand vs Sohan Singh And Ors. on 29 March, 2007
Equivalent citations: 2007CRILJ3703
that the prosecution case cannot be doubted due to
the defective investigation because I.O. is not under the control
of the complainant ... into the hands of the Investigating
Officer if the investigation is designedly defective. Any
of
Investigating Officer, in fairness to the prosecutrix as
well
also stated to be defective since the gun was not sent for forensic test. In the case of a defective investigation the Court ... into the hands of the investigating officer if the investigation is designedly defective. (See Karnel Singh v. State
suppressed by the prosecution creates suspicion
43. In the case of a defective investigation, the
Court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence ... into the hands of the investigating officer
if the investigation is designedly defective."
Patna High Court
observed that in a case where the investigation
is found to be defective the Court has to be more circumspect in
evaluating the evidence ... hands of the investigating
officer who may have kept the investigation designedly defective.
31. The conspectus of the aforesaid discussion is that the core
observed that in a case where the investigation
is found to be defective the Court has to be more circumspect in
evaluating the evidence ... hands of the investigating
officer who may have kept the investigation designedly defective.
31. The conspectus of the aforesaid discussion is that the core
Supreme Court has held that in cases of defective investigation the court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence but it would ... into the hands of the investigating officer if the investigation is designedly defective. There can be no dispute to the aforesaid proposition
held as under:
"5. In the case of a defective investigation the Court has to
be circumspect in evaluating the evidence. But it would ... into the
hands of the investigating officer if the investigation is
designedly defective. (See Karnel Singh vs. State
