cites: 99707164 doctypes: judgments

Manjunath Chennabasapa Madalli vs State Of Karnataka on 19 February, 2007

"It has been consistently laid down by this Court that where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person.

Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 61 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Hukam Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 February, 1977

(See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446) ; State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890). The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 211 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Eradu And Ors. vs State Of Hyderabad on 1 November, 1955

(See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446) ; State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890). The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 241 - Full Document

Earabhadrappa Alias Krishnappa vs State Of Karnataka on 11 March, 1983

(See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446) ; State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890). The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 502 - A P Sen - Full Document

State Of U.P. vs Sukhbasi And Ors. on 10 May, 1985

(See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446) ; State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890). The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 302 - A P Sen - Full Document

Balwinder Singh Alias Dalbir Singh vs State Of Punjab on 26 November, 1986

(See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446) ; State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890). The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 138 - A P Sen - Full Document

Ashok Kumar Chatterjee vs State Of M.P. on 2 May, 1989

(See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446) ; State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890). The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 350 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results