Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 156 (0.94 seconds)
Documents citing Satish Kumar Batra & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 1 April, 2009

Krishan Lal & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 8 February, 2012

This order shall dispose of two revision petitions bearing CRR-2025-2011 titled as 'Satish Kumar Vs. State of Haryana' and CRR-2068-2011 titled as `Babu Ram and others Vs. State of Haryana' in which the petitioners are praying for setting aside the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala dated 16.08.2011 by which they have been summoned under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [for short "Cr.P.C."].
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - R S Malik - Full Document

State vs . 1. Laxman Lal Junglia on 12 April, 2012

20. Applying the principles laid down in the afore-cited judgments, I am of the opinion that in the present case also, no sincere effort was made by the IO to join any independent public person either as an attesting witness to the disclosure statement or at the time of recovery and therefore the recovery made at the instance of accused is rendered doubtful. There is also no evidence that any blood was found on the recovered iron rods. Moreover, the iron rods were not shown to the doctor who conducted the postmortem to elicit his opinion that the injury found on the body of the deceased could be inflicted with the said weapon. Prosecution has not been able to explain or got over this deficiency.
Delhi District Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Shahnawaj Etc. on 15 March, 2012

He admitted that when he received the opinion regarding weapon of offence from Dr. Komal Singh already Ex.PW15/C, the same was bearing the sketch of the knife prepared by the doctor and the total length of the same was mentioned as 19.5 cms. He admitted that there was no specific identification mark on the knife. He admitted that such type of knives are easily available with other fruit sellers and in the market. It has been stated in case law Satish Kumar Vs. State, 1995(34) DRJ (DB) in para 33 that :­ 'Now we are left only with the evidence with regard to the disclosure statement allegedly made by the appellant and the recovery of blood stained knife and blood stained shirt at the instance of the appellant. At the outset, we may mention that the group of the blood appearing on the said articles could not be deciphered by the experts. Only human blood was found on the said articles. So, strictly speaking, the said articles cannot be linked with the crime in question. Be as it may, both the SHO and SI Sher Singh and Shushil Kumar admitted that no efforts were made by the State Vs.Shahnawaj etc. FIR No.388/08 Page No. 60 of 83 police to join any independent witnesses before recording the disclosure statement of Satish and before effecting the recoveries. It is not understood as to how the basic principle of investigation has been lost sight................. Merely having the brother of the deceased with them for this purpose does not remove the suspicion about the genuineness of disclosure statement and the recoveries allegedly effected on the basis of such disclosure statement.
Delhi District Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Atul Jain Etc on 8 July, 2011

54.In support of his arguments he has relied upon the citations i.e. Satish Kumar Vs State 1995 (3) CC Cases 252 (HC) in this case wherein it has been held that:­ "Non­joining of independent witness during disclosure FIR no.267/2009 State Vs Atul Jain etc 58 statement - Where no efforts were made by the police to join any independent witness before recording disclosure statement of the accused..."
Delhi District Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next