Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.25 seconds)Section 489C in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 26 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Pradeep Narayan Madgonkar Etc. Etc. vs State Of Maharashtra on 12 May, 1995
In Pradeep Narayan
Madgaonkar & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1995 SC
1930, Hon'ble Supreme Court examined the issue of the
requirement of the examination of independent witness and
whether the evidence of a police witness requires
corroboration. The Court herein held, that the same must be
subject to strict scrutiny. However, the evidence of police
officials cannot be discarded merely on the ground that they
belonged to the police force, and are either interested in the
investigating or the prosecuting agency. However, as far as
possible the corroboration of their evidence on material
particulars, should be sought. Thus, a witness is normally
considered to be independent, unless he springs from sources
which are likely to be tainted and this usually means that the
said witness has caused, to bear such enmity against the
accused, so as to implicate him falsely. In view of the above,
there can be no prohibition to the effect that police cannot be a
witness or that his deposition cannot be relied upon."
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
State Of U.P vs Anil Singh on 26 August, 1988
"The witnesses from the department of police cannot per se be
said to be untruthful or unreliable. It would depend upon the
veracity, credibility and unimpeachability of their testimony.
This Court, after referring to State of U.P. vs. Anil Singh, State
of NCT of Delhi vs. Sunil & Anr. And Ramjee Rai & Ors. vs.
State of Bihar, has laid down recently in Kashmiri Lal vs.
State of Haryana that there is no absolute command of law
that the police officers cannot be cited as witnesses and their
testimony should always be treated with suspicion.
Kashmiri Lal vs State Of Haryana on 15 May, 2013
"The witnesses from the department of police cannot per se be
said to be untruthful or unreliable. It would depend upon the
veracity, credibility and unimpeachability of their testimony.
This Court, after referring to State of U.P. vs. Anil Singh, State
of NCT of Delhi vs. Sunil & Anr. And Ramjee Rai & Ors. vs.
State of Bihar, has laid down recently in Kashmiri Lal vs.
State of Haryana that there is no absolute command of law
that the police officers cannot be cited as witnesses and their
testimony should always be treated with suspicion.