Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.40 seconds)

Shri Brij Pal Singh vs Cbi on 6 May, 2011

In the aforesaid case, it has also been laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that :­ " The law is settled that even in a criminal prosecution, when a witness is cross­examined and contradicted with the leave of the court by the party calling, his evidence cannot, as a matter of law, be treated as washed off the record altogether. It is for the Judge of fact to consider in each case, whether as a result of such cross­examination, the witness stands thoroughly discredited or can still be believed in regard to a part of the S.C No. 136/07 30/44 31 testimony. If the judge finds that in the process, the credit of the witness has not been completely shaken, he may, after reading and considering the evidence of the witness, as a whole, with due caution and care, accept, in the light of the other evidence on the record, that part of his testimony which he finds to be credit­worthy and act upon it."
Delhi High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 5 - S K Kait - Full Document

Radha Mohan Singh @ Lal Saheb & Others vs State Of U.P on 20 January, 2006

In the aforesaid case titled as "Radha Mohan Singh @ Lal Saheb & Ors. Vs. State of U.P' (cited as AIR 2006 SC 951)," it has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that :­ " It is well settled that the evidence of a prosecution witness cannot be rejected in toto merely because the prosecution chose to treat him as hostile and cross­examined him. The evidence of such witness cannot be treated as effaced or washed off the record altogether but the same can be accepted to the extent his version is found to be dependable on a careful scrutiny thereof."
Supreme Court of India Cites 37 - Cited by 391 - G P Mathur - Full Document

Smt. Sandhya Jadhav vs State Of Maharashtra on 31 March, 2006

In the case titled as "Sandhya Jadhav VS. State of Maharashtra ( reported as (2006) 4 SCC 653)", it has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that :­ " For bringing in operation of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, it has to be established that the act was committed without premeditation , in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel without the offender having taken undue advantage and not having acted in a cruel or unusual manner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 55 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next