Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.21 seconds)
Bhaartari S/O Kailash Baheliya And 2 ... vs The State Of Mah, Thr Pso, Gondia City on 18 March, 2026 cites

Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 13 October, 2022

33. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that where panch witnesses admit that their signatures were obtained on prepared documents or that they had not actually witnessed the seizure, the evidentiary value of such panchnamas becomes doubtful and cannot be safely relied upon. (Rajesh and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2023) 15 SCC 521; Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2022) 4 SCC 497; Pradeep Narayan Madgaonkar v. State of Maharashtra, (1995) 4 SCC
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 54 - Cited by 73 - Full Document

Jayantibhai Chaturbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 4 May, 2017

19 apeal 786-08 & 57-09.odt 8 admitted that when they were called to the police station, the weapons and clothes allegedly seized from the appellants were already kept on the table. Such evidence indicates that the panch witnesses had no occasion to verify the actual seizure and were only asked to sign the documents prepared by the police. Such admission strike at the root of the prosecution case. The learned Counsel for the appellants has relied upon the case of Jayantibhai Chaturbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat, 2025 SCC Online SC 2822 to support their contention.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1