Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 21 (0.56 seconds)
Harendra Dhakad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 17 April, 2026 cites

Brijendra Singh & Ors vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 April, 2017

16. Much reliance has been placed by the learned counsel appearing appea for the respondent No.2 on the judgment by the Apex Court in the case of Brijendra Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (2017) 7 SCC 706 to contend that while arraying the accused by invoking Section 319 of Cr.P.C., something more than "a prima facie case" is required to be seen by learned trial Court and mechanically such an applicant cannot be allowed. However, in the case in hand, though a plea of alibi is taken by the respondent No.2, in the considered opinion of this Court, the material available on recor record cannot be said to be sufficient on the basis of which, the said plea of the respondent could have been accepted at this stage as the plea of alibi by the respondent No.2 may be required to be proved by cogent evidence during trial particularly, by taking into consideration the subsequent evidence of PW/3 and PW/4, which also has not been taken into consideration by the learned trial court while passing the impugned order14.02.2017 14.02.2017 passed in S.T. No.177/2011.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 257 - A K Sikri - Full Document

State Of Orissa vs Debendra Nath Padhi on 29 November, 2004

He further submits that before the learned trial Court, during the course of trial, evidence of the prose prosecution cution witnesses including the present applicant was recorded and PW-3, PW 3, i.e., the complainant, in his evidence specifically deposed regarding the commission of offence by respondent No.2. He submits that in the teeth of the evidence brought on record against again respondent No.2, not only during investigation but also before the learned trial Court, the plea of respondent No.2 that he was not present at the place of incident on the relevant date could not have been decided without adjudication of evidence during trial. He submits that the learned trial Court erred in rejecting the application filed by the applicant. The learned trial Court ought to have appreciated that on the date of incident, it was a school holiday being Saturday. In such circumstances, the application application ought not to have been rejected. Learned counsel places reliance on the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ajay Khemaria and Anr. Vs. State of M.P. &Anr. passed in MCRC No.693/2016, No.693/2016, and the judgment delivered by the Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa Vs. Debendra Nath Padhi, reported in 2005 (1) SCC 568.
Supreme Court of India Cites 35 - Cited by 1174 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next