Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.55 seconds)
Documents citing Hukum Singh And Anr vs State Of Rajasthan Through P.P on 27 May, 2010

Such The Reliance Placed On Varkey ... vs . State Of Kerala on 4 December, 2012

45. Similarly the contention sought to be raised by the defence that the witness Ramesh Kumar, Uday Singh and Nareder Kumar witnessing document Ex.PW1/A Surprise Check Memo and also in document Ex.PW1/D site plan have not been cited as witnesses by the prosecution and it would draw an adverse inference against them is only to be rejected. The prosecution is at liberty to prove its case through own reliable documents and witnesses. It was held in Bunty @ Guddu V. State of M.P. 2003 (3) CC Cases HC 306 and also in Hukum Singh & Ors. V. State of Rajasthan 2000 (3) CC Cases (SC) 64 that Public Prosecutor is expected to produce evidence in support of the prosecution case and not in derogation of the case. It was held that if there was too many witnesses on the same point , the Public Prosecutor is at liberty to choose two or some amongst them alone so that the time of the Court can be saved. Applying this ratio in the present case the non examination of the above said witnesses will not be of any adverse impact to the case of the prosecution.
Delhi District Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1