Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.50 seconds)

Asgar Chowdhury vs State Of West Bengal on 12 December, 2022

13. Learned advocate appearing for the State has submitted that, the post-mortem report being Exhibit 9, the inquest report being Exhibit 13, and the deposition of PW 14, PW 16 and the seizure list dated April 19, 2018 being Exhibit 2 by which the innerwear of the appellant was seized from the house of the appellant have proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant raped the victim using force resulting in her death. The innerwear of the appellant seized by Exhibit 2 had bloodstains. He has referred to the deposition of the PW 2, PW 8, PW 9 and PW 13. He has submitted that, PW 2 had 9 corroborated the statements recorded under Section 164 of the criminal procedure code. He has relied upon 2012 volume 2 Supreme Court Cases (criminal) 440 (Bhajju @ Karan Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh) and 2014 volume 6 Supreme Court Cases 59 (Periyasami vs. The State) in support of his contentions.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - D Basak - Full Document

State vs . Deep Chand Saini on 29 August, 2016

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Periyasami v/s State (2014) 6 SCC 59 has clearly held that, "testimony of the hostile witness can be relied upon to convict the accused if his evidence is relevant, material and corroborated. It has further observed that merely for reason that witnesses have turned hostile in their cross examination, testimony of hostile witness in examination in chief cannot be outrightly discarded, provided the same is corroborated".
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1