Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 162 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude And Ors. vs State Of Maharashtra on 19 August, 1976

Ghentu Mondal And Ors. And Baidya Nath ... vs The State Of West Bengal on 2 May, 2006

21. The other injured person namely P.W.8 Santu Mondal never claimed during investigation that the appellant Probir assaulted him with a 'Kirich'. What he stated earlier was that Probir dealt a blow by means of a 'Dao'. Giving a new twist and turns to the entire incident, another version of the incident was sought to be projected during the trial. Mr. Dastoor contends that in view of another version of the incident coming up before the Court, absolute reliance should not have been placed on the distorted statements made during the trial. Referring to the case of Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra it is contendent that when contradictions not on mere matters of detail, but on vital points, it would not be safe to rely on the evidence.
Calcutta High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - P K Deb - Full Document

Yunus vs State Of U.P. on 12 December, 2022

(34) In case of Raja vs. State of Tamil Nadu: 2008 SCC Online Mad 478 held that "..... of course, the recovery cannot by itself be regarded as conclusive piece of evidence for incriminating accused, but it is certainly a piece of evidence which goes to support the other evidence about the guilt of accused, vide Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude vs. State of Maharashra, (1976) (4) SCC 441, and further the recovery of the blood-stained material object on the disclosure statement of the appellant provides enough corroboration to the prosecution evidence against the appellant, vide Puran Singh vs. State of Punjab, 1995 Supp (3) SCC 665. In the said case, the fact relating to the recovery of bloodstained weapon was similar to the instant case, wherein, the Apex Court observed that according to the report of serologist, the bloodstained on the kirpan were of human origin. The recovery of bloodstained Kirpan on the disclosure statement of the appellant provides enough corroboration to the prosecution evidence against the appellant.
Allahabad High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Muuna And Ors. vs State Of Rajasthan on 4 July, 2001

16. It is the defence case that conduct of Shiv Prasad (informant) (PW 15) is in a pool of doubt as is reflected by his three statements namely Parcha Bayan (ExP20) police statement (Ex D4) recorded Under Section 161 CrPC and statement recorded Under Section 164 CrPC by the Magistrate (Ex D5) which denote improvements and contradictions. Here let us have a resume of the decisions cited by the defence counsel State v. Sardara Singh (8), and Namdev Daulat Dhayagude v. State of Maharashtra (9).
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - K S Rathore - Full Document

Vishambhar vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 October, 1989

Therefore, this authority is of no help to the accused appellant In Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1977 SC 981 it was held by the Apex Court that where the story narrated by the witness in his evidence before the Court differs substantially from that set out on his statement before the police and there are large number of contradictions in his evidence not on mere matters of detail, but on vital points, it would not be safe to rely on his evidence and it may be excluded from consideration in determining the guilt of accused. In the present case I do not find any substantial large number of contradictions, between the statement of the witnesses given in Court and before police which may make it unsafe 10 rely on the same. The evidence as discussed above has clearly raised pointed finger towards the accused-appellant to have committed the crime with which he has been charged,
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Abdul Sufan Laskar And Ors. vs State Of Assam on 31 July, 2007

18. No doubt, if there are large number of contradictions in the evidence given before the Court and the previous statement on vital points it will be unsafe to rely on such evidence. It has been held in Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra which is also a decision relied on by the Id defence counsel, that where the story narrated by a witness in his evidence before the Court differs substantially from that set out in his statement before the police and there are large number of contradictions in the evidence not only in matters of detail but also on vital points, it would not be safe to rely on such evidence.
Gauhati High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A P Subba - Full Document

Puran vs State Of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh) on 8 July, 2004

Similar, are the statements of Hemnarayan (P.W. 2). Since these clothes were not recovered from the accused and recovered from the spot, therefore, the accused can not be connected on the basis of this circumstance with the murder of his own wife. Even otherwise, if we take this circumstance, as it is that human blood of Group 'B' was found on these clothes, merely on this circumstance, the accused can not be held guilty. As has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, reported in AIR 1977 Supreme Court 381, "Recovery of clothes stained with human blood from accused--This can not be regarded as conclusive evidence incriminating accused-- It is a piece of evidence which may support other evidence about guilt accused."
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - L C Bhadoo - Full Document

Ramachandra Vithuji Kothare vs Industrial Court, Nagpur And Ors. on 11 April, 1984

This view is supported by another earlier decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Namdeo v. State industrial Court, W.P. No. 781 of 1974 decided on 21st July, 1981 by Ginwala and Joshi, JJ., in which case also the simple termination effected after dropping the domestic enquiry was held to be within the mischief of Ss. 2(oo) and 25(F) of the I.D. Act.
Bombay High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Haribhau Krishnaji Deshmukh And Ors. on 13 June, 2003

What is required to be appreciated in case of such evidence is to ascertain whether it strikes as genuine. This principle will have to be borne in mind while judging evidence of eye witnesses in this case. I have pointed out more than once that these witnesses have given versions of the incident before the court which runs counter to their version before the Investigating Officer. The Supreme Court has observed in the case of Namdeo Daulat Dhayagude and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra that where a story narrated by the witnesses in his evidence before the court differs substantially from that set out in his statement before the police and there are number of contradictions in his evidence not on mere matters of details but on vital points, it would not be safe to rely on his evidence and it may excluded from consideration in determining the guilt of the accused. By applying ration of this Supreme court ruling to the case on hand it can safely be said that prosecution case as disclosed through the evidence of eye witnesses is highly suspicious."
Bombay High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Manish vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 8 September, 2008

In support of his contention reliance was placed by learned counsel for the appellant on a decision of the Supreme Court in "Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude & Others Vs. State of Maharashtra", AIR 1977 SCC 381 : 1977 Crl.J 238. It was further contended that Pinki, PW-2, named the appellant and his co-accused, Suresh, as having been last seen with the deceased by her. However, as the learned trial court inspite of such evidence acquitted the co-accused, Suresh, the said circumstance of last seen ceased to be incriminating against the appellant also.
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - B N Chaturvedi - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next