independent person was made witness. Also, the
seizure memo is doubtful as antedated for bearing the FIR
number in it. Lastly, it is submitted that ... state and the Ld. LAC for the accused and carefully
perused the documents on record. Before appreciating the
evidence for deciding the present case
testimonies of all police witnesses. Also, the
seizure memo is doubtful as antedated for bearing the FIR number in it. Lastly,
it is submitted that ... state and the Ld.
Counsel for the accused and carefully perused the documents on record. Before
appreciating the evidence for deciding the present case
alleged recovery has been made. Also, the seizure memo is
doubtful as antedated for bearing the FIR number in it. Lastly, it is
submitted that ... state and
the Ld. Counsel for the accused and carefully perused the
documents on record. Before appreciating the evidence for
deciding the present case
secret
informer. He alleged that the seizure memo is doubtful being antedated as it bears the FIR
number. Lastly, it is submitted that there ... state and the Ld. Counsel for
the accused and carefully perused the documents on record. Before adverting to the
appreciation of evidence for deciding
from the possession of the
accused or that all the proceedings and documents were prepared while sitting
in the PS or that he had deposed ... seizure memo and sketch of buttondar knife are doubtful as being
antedated for bearing the FIR number. He stated that the handing over memo
that the seizure memo and sketch of katta are doubtful as being
antedated for bearing the FIR number. He stated that the handing over memo ... state and the Ld.
counsel for the accused and carefully perused the documents on record. Before
adverting to the appreciation of evidence for deciding
Rakesh Singh vs State Of U.P. on 26 November, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2003CRILJ1838
Author
State vs Hari Prakash Etc. Fir No.166/08 1 To67 on 16 September, 2014
Chandni Mahal 11/23
presence. He further denied that all the documents were prepared
while sitting at the PS. He further denied that ... Amaan @ Feteh PS Chandni Mahal 12/23
memo is doubtful as antedated for bearing the FIR number in it.
Lastly, it is submitted that
By Supreme Court In Ajmer Singh vs State Of Haryana 2010 on 2 April, 2011
