Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.28 seconds)Section 292 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Datu Ram vs State on 25 January, 1996
In
the case of Datu Ram Vs. State 1996 1 AD (Delhi) 52, it has been held that
all the links starting from the seizure of sample till the same reaches the
hands of public analyst must be proved to conclude that the seals remained
intact.
Rattan Lal vs State Of Punjab on 10 April, 1964
At this juncture, it would be relevant to refer to a case law reported as
Rattan Lal versus State 1987 (2) Crimes 29 the Hon'ble Delhi High
Court wherein it has been observed that
"if the investigating agency
deliberately ignores to comply with
the provisions of the Act the courts
will have to approach their action with
reservation. The matter has to be
viewed with suspicion if the
provisions of law are not strictly
complied with and the least that can
be said is that it is so done with an
oblique motive. This failure to bring
on record, the DD entry creates a
reasonable doubt in the prosecution
version and attributes oblique motive
on the part of the prosecution.
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Dhanpat vs Punjab State Through Collector And Ors. on 30 August, 1996
In the case of Dhanpat Vs. State of Punjab 2000 (1) CC Cases HC
52, it has been held that in the absence of any link evidence that the
property was deposited in the malkhana intact, accused is entitled to benefit
of doubt.
Sadhu Singh Roda S/O Buta Singh Etc vs State Of Punjab on 25 January, 1984
I have also relied upon citation Sadhu Singh versus State of
Punjab, (1997) 3 Crimes 55 (PH) wherein it is held that:
Lalji Shukla vs State on 29 October, 1999
In Lalji Shukla Vs. State (2000) 1 AD (Cr.) DHC, M.S.A. Siddiqui,
J. of Delhi High Court observed as follows:
1