Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.28 seconds)
Mahendra Bhuian Son Of Sammal @ ... vs The State Jharkhand on 14 March, 2024 cites

Ravi Dhingra vs The State Of Haryana on 1 March, 2023

68. Thus, the necessary ingredients which the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, before the Court are not only an act of kidnapping or abduction but thereafter the demand of ransom, coupled with the threat to life of a person who has been kidnapped or abducted, must be there. Further reference in this regard may be taken from the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ravi Dhingra vs. State of Haryana, (2023) 6 SCC 76.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 4 - B V Nagarathna - Full Document

Acharaparambath Pradeepan & Anr. à ... vs State Of Kerala à Respondents on 15 December, 2006

"50. Undue delay in conducting a TIP has a serious bearing on the credibility of the identification process. Though there is no fixed timeline within which the TIP must be conducted and the consequence of the delay would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case [Acharaparambath Pradeepan v. State of Kerala, (2006) 13 SCC 643 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 241] , it is imperative to hold the TIP at the earliest. The possibility of the TIP witnesses seeing the accused is sufficient to cast doubt about their credibility. The following decisions of this Court on the consequence of delay in conducting TIP have emphasised that the possibility of
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 89 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1