Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.20 seconds)
Subhash Chand vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 October, 2001 cites

Dhananjoy Chaterjee vs State Of W.B on 11 January, 1994

In Dhananjoy Chatterjee's case (supra), the decision of this Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, [1984] 4 SCC 116, was relied on. In the later case, it was also held that a false explanation or false plea taken by the accused can be used as an additional link in the chain of circumstantial evidence subject to satisfication of three essential conditions, namely (i) various links in the chain of evidence led by the prosecution have been satisfactorily proved, (ii) the said circumstance points to the guilt of the accused with reasonable definiteness, and (iii) the circumstance is in proxim-ity to the time and situation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 304 - N P Singh - Full Document

Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 July, 1984

In Dhananjoy Chatterjee's case (supra), the decision of this Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, [1984] 4 SCC 116, was relied on. In the later case, it was also held that a false explanation or false plea taken by the accused can be used as an additional link in the chain of circumstantial evidence subject to satisfication of three essential conditions, namely (i) various links in the chain of evidence led by the prosecution have been satisfactorily proved, (ii) the said circumstance points to the guilt of the accused with reasonable definiteness, and (iii) the circumstance is in proxim-ity to the time and situation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3286 - Full Document

Shankarlal Gyarasilal Dixit vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 December, 1980

In Shankarlal Gyarasilal Dixit's case (supra), this Court cautioned - "human nature is too willing, when faced with brutal crimes, to spin stories out of strong suspicions". This Court has held time and again that between may be true and must be true there is a long distance to travel which must be covered by clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence by the prosecu-tion before an accused is condemned a convict.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 321 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document
1