Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.05 seconds)

S.C. No. 63/10 Fir No. 94/10 State vs . Chandeshwar Thakur 1/38 on 7 September, 2013

13. Place of recording of statement of complainant Akash is S.C. No. 63/10 FIR No. 94/10 State vs. Chandeshwar Thakur 31/38 also under cloud. In his examination in chief, PW-5 Akash stated that police met him in Akash Hospital and recorded his statement, which he had proved as Ex. PW-5/A and on this statement FIR was recorded. However, in his cross-examination he stated that police did not record his statement in Akash Hospital. He rather stated that police recorded his statement on 1.3.2010 in front of his shop and he could not tell the time when his statement was recorded. In contrast, PW-9 Ct. Sharan Dutt stated that he alongwith ASI Gopi Chand, reached Max Hospital where rukka was prepared and handed over to him. PW-18 SI Gopi Chand also stated that Akash met him in Max Hospital where he recorded his statement Ex. PW-5/A on which he prepared rukka. There are thus different versions regarding the place where the statement of the complainant Akash was recorded - once he stated that it was recorded in Akash Hospital, then he stated that it was recorded in front of his shop whereas PW-9 Ct. Sharan Dutt and PW-18 SI Gopi Chand claimed that it was recorded in Max Hospital. Thus, the place where statement of complainant Akash was recorded has not been clarified by the prosecution.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

1 State vs . Bindeshwar on 25 January, 2014

Site plan is also silent about the location of light any foot over bridge, underpass, subway, zebra crossing or the distance between offending vehicle from footpath etc. There is no evidence in which lane the vehicle was being driven. In such circumstances, none of the attendent circumstances are shown.Therefore, this court is of the opinion that the manner of driving of bus could not be proved at all to call the same as rash or negligent. Accordingly, there is no hesitation to hold that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the Page 3 of 4 Judgment in case FIR No.399/03 PS IP Estate dt.25.1.2014 4 State Vs. Bindeshwar factum of rashness or negligence on the part of the accused.
Delhi District Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1