Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.35 seconds)
State vs . Shakti Singh S/O Bishan Singh, R/O ... on 26 November, 2010 cites

Kali Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 24 September, 1973

26. Moreover, in Kali Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1973 SC 2773, the Apex Court had observed as follows :­ "Another Golden thread which runs through the web of the administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the S.C. No. 95/09 Page 19/22 ­20­ accused, and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought to be established by circumstantial evidence. Rule has accordingly been laid down that unless the evidence adduced in the case is consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and is inconsistent with that of his innocence, the Court should refrain from recording a finding of guilt of the accused. It is also an accepted rule that in case the Court entertains reasonable doubt regarding the guilt of the accused, the accused must have the benefit of that doubt. The rule regarding that benefit of doubt also does not warrant acquittal of the accused by resort to surmises, conjectures or fanciful considerations.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 946 - H R Khanna - Full Document

Tarseem Kumar vs Delhi Administration on 18 August, 1994

In Tarseem Kumar vs. Delhi Administration, 1995 Cr.L.J. 470, it was laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court that where the case of prosecution has been proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of material produced before the Court, the motive looses its importance. But in a case which is based on circumstantial evidence, motive for committing crime on the part of accused assumes greater importance. It was further emphasised that if each of the circumstance proved on behalf of the prosecution is accepted by the Court for the purpose of recording finding that it was the accused, who committed crime in question, even in absence of any proof of motive for commission of such crime, the accused could be convicted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 69 - N P Singh - Full Document

Dantuluri Ram Raju And Ors vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Anr on 16 December, 1971

In Bokaraju Venkataparase Raju vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1993) Supp. (4) SCC 191, it was observed that Court has to be watchful and avoid danger of allowing the suspicion to take place of legal proof. For sometime unconsciously, it may happen to be a short step between moral certainty and legal proof. At times, it can be a case of "may be true"
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 85 - H R Khanna - Full Document
1