Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.26 seconds)Section 397 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 394 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Sucha Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 July, 2003
45. Similarly, in the case of Sucha Singh & Anr. v. State of
Punjab 2003 (7) SCC 643 Hon'ble Supreme Court held that:
Gurbachan Singh vs Satpal Singh & Ors on 26 September, 1989
"20. Exaggerated devotion to the rule of benefit of doubt must
not nurture fanciful doubts or lingering suspicion and thereby
destroy social defence. Justice cannot be made sterile on the
plea that it is better to let hundred guilty escape than punish
an innocent. Letting guilty escape is not doing justice
according to law. (See Gurbachan Singh v. Satpal Singh &
Ors. (AIR 1990 SC 209).
State Of U.P vs Ashok Kumar Srivastava on 14 January, 1992
Prosecution is not required to meet
any and every hypothesis put forward by the accused (See
State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava (AIR 1992 SC 840).
A reasonable doubt is not an imaginary, trivial or merely
possible doubt, but a fair doubt based upon reason and
common sense. It must grow out of the evidence in the case.
If a case is proved perfectly, it is argued that it is artificial; if a
case has some flaws inevitable because human beings are
prone to err, it is argued that it is too imperfect. One wonders
whether in the meticulous hypersensitivity to eliminate a rare
innocent from being punished, many guilty persons must be
allowed to escape.