Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 332 (3.59 seconds)
Documents citing Mulla & Another vs State Of U.P on 8 February, 2010

Gireesan Nair vs The State Of Kerala on 11 November, 2022

27. It is a matter of great importance both for the investigating agency and for the accused and a fortiori for the proper administration of justice that a TIP is held without avoidable and unreasonable delay after the arrest of the accused. This becomes necessary to eliminate the possibility of the accused being shown to the witnesses before the test identification parade. This is a very common plea of the accused, and therefore, the prosecution has to be cautious to ensure that there is no scope for making such an allegation. If, however, circumstances are beyond control and there is some delay, it cannot be said to be fatal to the prosecution. But reasons should be given as to why there was a delay (Mulla and Anr. v. State of U.P.25 and Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar26).
Supreme Court of India Cites 40 - Cited by 15 - P S Narasimha - Full Document

Cr. Case/189/2022 on 20 January, 2023

26. TIPs belong to the stage of investigation by the police. It assures that investigation is proceeding in the right direction. It is a rule of prudence which is required to be followed in cases where the accused is not known to the witness or the complainant (Matru alias Girish Chandra v. State of U.P.; Mulla and Anr. v. State of U.P. and C. Muniappan and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu). The evidence of a TIP is admissible under Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act. However, it is not a substantive piece of evidence. Instead, it is used to corroborate the evidence given by witnesses before a court of law at the time of trial.
Delhi District Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State Of Gujarat vs Govindbhai Madhubhai Koli on 16 December, 2022

In this case, considering the observations of the Apex Court in the case of Girish and another (supra) and perusing the evidence on record, here in this case, witness Jahiben Rambhai Koli Ex.10 and Tikuben Bhabhlubhai Koli Ex.11 have admitted that the accused was shown to them before the T.I. Parade was held as they had visited the police station where the accused was kept and police had shown him to be the accused. Secondly, T.I. Parade has been held after a period of 5 months and 10 days, which is ordinate delay, for which no plausible explanation has been submitted and the explanation is contradictory to the version of the investigating officer. Thirdly, all the witness and the accused, as per their evidence travelled together from police station to the office of the Mamlatdar, Jafarabad and from the evidence of the Mamlatdar it is clear that no precautions have been taken before conducting T.I. Parade. In this case, dummy persons who were in the queue were of the same village and panch witness of the T.I. Parade are also of the same village. So it was easy for the witness to find out the person who was not of his village.
Gujarat High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - S H Vora - Full Document

Anutab @ Anutabh @ Beta Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 May, 2025

58. Similar ratio is laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh A. Naika (supra) where Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the list of judgment where sentence without remission for the remainder of the convict's life was granted starting from Swsamy Shraddananda Vs. State of Karnataka, (2008) 13 SCC 767, Sebastian Vs. State of Kerala, (2010) 1 SCC 58 to Deen Dayal Tiwari Vs. State of U.P., 2025 SCC Online SC 237 and noted cases wherein life sentence has been imposed till the end of the convict's natural life subject to remission starting from Mulla Vs. State of U.P., (2010) 3 SCC 508 to Arvind Singh Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 11 SCC 1. Hon'ble Supreme Court directed to take off the hangman's noose from the appellant's neck and instead directed that he remains in prison till the end of his days given by God Almighty.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 45 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

In Reference vs Anutab @ Anutabh @ Beta Prajapati on 22 May, 2025

58. Similar ratio is laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh A. Naika (supra) where Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the list of judgment where sentence without remission for the remainder of the convict's life was granted starting from Swsamy Shraddananda Vs. State of Karnataka, (2008) 13 SCC 767, Sebastian Vs. State of Kerala, (2010) 1 SCC 58 to Deen Dayal Tiwari Vs. State of U.P., 2025 SCC Online SC 237 and noted cases wherein life sentence has been imposed till the end of the convict's natural life subject to remission starting from Mulla Vs. State of U.P., (2010) 3 SCC 508 to Arvind Singh Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 11 SCC 1. Hon'ble Supreme Court directed to take off the hangman's noose from the appellant's neck and instead directed that he remains in prison till the end of his days given by God Almighty.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 45 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next