Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.20 seconds)

L.L. Kale vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 30 November, 1999

In support of the submission that there being a material deviation from the FIR version and the version before the Court regarding the involvement of these two accused their involvement becomes doubtful learned counsel placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in " L.L.Kale vs State of Maharashtra", 2000(1) Recent Criminal Reports(Crl.) 299. It was also contended that just because these two accused were in the company of Sanjay Goel it could not be said that they had shared with him common intention to stab PW-4 Rajesh.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 12 - M B Shah - Full Document

Ashok Kumar Gupta , Vidya Sagar Gupta & ... vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 21 March, 1997

In support of this submission Mr.Andley cited one judgment of this Court in " Ashok Kumar vs State", 1994 JCC 522. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellants Prakash and Kamal @ Kashmiri had contended that the case as per the FIR was totally different from what had been projected by the injured Rajesh(PW-4) at the time of his evidence inasmuch as in his complaint to the police had not assigned any role to CRL.A. 125, 131 & 133/2004 Page 4 of 10 any of these two convicted accused while in his examination before the Court he had claimed that they had caught hold of him and Sanjay had stabbed him and thus he had clearly made a material improvement while deposing in Court and that improvement made him totally unreliable witness despite the fact that he was an injured witness and consequently the conviction of these two accused-appellants deserved to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 79 - Cited by 889 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1