Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.22 seconds)

State Of Haryana vs Prince And Others on 16 November, 2017

8. During cross-examination of the witness by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons, PW-3 admitted that he had not told the police officials at the time of recording of his statement regarding the total number of locks which he had put in his shop and which had been broken. He admitted that he had not seen any of the accused breaking the locks of his shop. He admitted that FIR was not lodged on my complaint. He denied that no one had told him that accused persons had broken the locks and due to said fact he had not mentioned in his examination-in-chief, the name of the person who had so told him. The police officials had prepared site plan in State Vs. Prince and Ors.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 8 - M S Sindhu - Full Document
1   2 Next