Saeedul Hasan vs State Of U.P. on 7 November, 2017
41. As far as it is argued by learned counsel that P.W.1 is not eye witness the facts and circumstances of this incident are not within his knowledge. The following case law is relevant on the point
"In the case of Sukkhar Vs. State of U.P. 2000 SCC (Crl.) 419, Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered provisions of Section 6 Evidence Act and observed that witness stated and indicated that the injured told him that his nephew had fired at him would become admissible under Section 6 of Evidence Act. In this case witness heard only sound of fire near scene of occurrence and did not see the victim being hit by bullet. The injured was found by the witness in the injured state, who apprised him about the occurrence".