Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 920 (0.85 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Rajasthan vs Shera Ram @ Vishnu Dutta on 1 December, 2011

That The Accident Actually Took Place vs State on 28 May, 2015

20. In the case at hand, the star witness of the prosecution was PW-1 who has deposed that one tempo was being driven in a rash and negligent driving and had hit one person. He made call on 100 number and police had come to the spot. This witness has not deposed anything about the speed of the tempo or the manner in which the tempo was being driven. Merely making a bald statement that the accused was driving the vehicle in rash and negligent manner is not sufficient to prove the rashness / negligence on part of the accused. Moreover there are no photographs of the spot on the judicial record. The reason for non-filing of the photographs is known best to the IO who has not been examined. The site plan is also merely a perfunctory one and nothing material could be inferred from it. The mechanical inspection report is also of no State v. Vishnu Dutt Joshi U/s 279/304A IPC 8/9 FIR No. 347/05 PS Paschim Vihar use to the prosecution as no damage was found on the vehicle as no collision with another object had taken place.
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State Of Assam vs Md. Taleb Ali on 18 July, 2017

34. A similar view was expressed in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. Shera Ram, (2012) 1 SCC 602 wherein the Supreme Court held that a judgment of acquittal has the obvious consequence of granting freedom to the accused and unless the judgment in appeal is contrary to evidence, palpably erroneous or a view which could not have been taken by the court of competent jurisdiction keeping in view the settled Crl. A. No. 24 of 2008 Page 12 of 17 canons of criminal jurisprudence, the Court shall be reluctant to interfere with such judgment of acquittal.
Gauhati High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 8 - H K Sarma - Full Document

Bagh Singh vs State And Ors on 10 September, 2013

The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Shera Ram alias Vishnu Dutta (2012) 1 SCC 602, held that there is no documentary or oral evidence to prove the fact that the injuries caused by the respondent to the deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. This, however, cannot be stated as an absolute proposition of law and the question whether the particular injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death or not, is a question of fact, which will have to be determined in light of the facts, circumstances and evidence produced in a given case. There could be cases where injuries caused upon the body of the deceased per se can irresistibly lead to the conclusion that the injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, while there may be other cases.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - M Rafiq - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Dhananjay Bhivadas Pore And Anr on 27 January, 2022

The standard of test to be applied shall be of legal insanity and not medical insanity, as observed in State of Rajasthan v. Shera Ram [State of Rajasthan v. Shera Ram, (2012) 1 SCC 602 : (2012) 1 SCC (Cri) 406] , as follows: (Shera Ram case [State of Rajasthan v. Shera Ram, (2012) 1 SCC 602 : (2012) 1 SCC (Cri) 406] , SCC p. 614, para 19) "19. ... Once, a person is found to be suffering from mental disorder or mental deficiency, which takes within its ambit hallucinations, dementia, loss of memory and self-control, at all relevant times by way of appropriate documentary and oral evidence, the person concerned would be entitled to seek resort to the general exceptions from criminal liability."
Bombay High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - M N Jadhav - Full Document

The State Of Mah vs Shri Suresh Vithal Mule on 15 February, 2017

18. The Apex Court in case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Shera Ram @ Vishnu Dutta (supra) has observed that the judgment of acquittal has a consequence of granting freedom to the accused. Unless the judgment in appeal is contrary to evidence, palpably erroneous or a view which could not have been taken by the Court of competent jurisdiction keeping in view the settled cannons of criminal jurisprudence, the Appellate Court shall be reluctant to interfere with such judgment of acquittal. It is further observed that penal laws in India are primarily based upon certain fundamental procedural values, which are right to fair trial and presumption of innocence. A person is presumed to be innocent till proven guilt and once held to be not guilty of a criminal charge, he enjoys the benefit of such presumption which could be interfered with only for valid and proper reasons.
Bombay High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - P D Naik - Full Document

State vs Jalla Khan & Ors on 10 September, 2013

The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Shera Ram alias Vishnu Dutta (2012) 1 SCC 602, held that there is no documentary or oral evidence to prove the fact that the injuries caused by the respondent to the deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. This, however, cannot be stated as an absolute proposition of law and the question whether the particular injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death or not, is a question of fact, which will have to be determined in light of the facts, circumstances and evidence produced in a given case. There could be cases where injuries caused upon the body of the deceased per se can irresistibly lead to the conclusion that the injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, while there may be other cases.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 34 - Cited by 1 - M Rafiq - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next