Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.31 seconds)
K. Yoga Narasimha Reddy Bujji, Nellore ... vs State Of A.P., Rep. By P.P., Hyd on 19 June, 2024 cites

State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Kriparam on 25 September, 2003

determined. It would indicate, he emphasized, the blood allegedly found on the clothes of PW1 was not of human origin and thereby he was not present at the scene. He relied upon State of M.P. v. Kriparam1 to contend that when no opinion was given by serologist as to the origin of the blood found on the relevant articles such as crime weapon and clothes of accused, recovery of the said articles would be of no assistance to the prosecution. Learned senior counsel further argued that, as admitted by PW3, though PWs 1 to 3 are known to each other, they did not talk with one another after the incident at the scene which is unnatural. It also signifies that none of them was present at the scene of offence. Learned senior counsel argued that PW1 to 3 were not at all present at the spot and they did not witness the incident as to who killed the deceased and on the other hand, after knowing about the murder of deceased committed by some unknown persons, PWs1 to 3 came to the spot and at the instance of LW11-K.Babu Reddy, they were set up as eye witnesses to the incident by the police because LW11 had some disputes with the deceased, as one Anitha, the daughter of LW11's elder brother lost to Smt. Jayasudha, the wife of accused in the elections for MPTC held during 2006.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 92 - Full Document

Pandurang Chandrakant Mhatre & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 8 October, 2009

In Pandurang Chandrakant Mhatre's case (supra 2) cited by the appellant, the Apex Court having made a survey of its own decisions, exhorted that before relying upon the testimony of interested witnesses, adequate assurance from other circumstances or materials is required to be seen. The evidence of such witnesses has to be examined with great care and caution to obviate possibility of false implications or over implication. The Apex Court further observed that in cases involving rival political factions or group enimitis, it is not unusual to rope in persons other than those who were actually involved. In such a case, court should guard against the danger of convicting innocent persons and scrutinize evidence carefully and, if doubt arises, benefit should be given to the accused.
Supreme Court of India Cites 65 - Cited by 146 - R M Lodha - Full Document

Saddik @ Lalo Gulam Hussein Shaikh & Ors vs State Of Gujarat on 3 October, 2016

In Saddik and Ors vs. State of Gujarat7 also the Apex Court reiterated the same legal principle. Therefore, the argument of the learned senior counsel for appellant that there was no grudge for accused against the deceased as the MPTC election was held long back in 2006 wherein his wife was elected and hence the question of his committing brutal murder of deceased due to political vendetta does not arise and prosecution failed to prove motive, carry no much significance because the prosecution case mainly pivots on the eye witness account of PWs 1 to 3 & 5. Hence, we have to scrutinize the veracity of the evidence of these witnesses.
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 30 - P C Ghosh - Full Document
1