Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.39 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 308 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Gulam Sarbar vs State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) on 7 October, 2013
In the case of Gulam Sarbar vs. State of Bihar
(2014) 3 SCC 401, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme
Court that:
Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 14 February, 2020
In Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar v State of Bihar,
(2020) 3 SCC 443, it was observed as under:
Rai Sandeep @ Deepu vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 7 August, 2012
In Rai Sandeep [Rai Sandeep v. State
(NCT of Delhi), (2012) 8 SCC 21 : (2012) 3 SCC
(Cri) 750], this Court had an occasion to consider
who can be said to be a "sterling witness". In para
22, it is observed and held as under:
Abdul Sayeed vs State Of M.P on 14 September, 2010
In Abdul Sayeed v. State of Madhya
Pradesh [(2010) 10 SCC 259], the Supreme Court
held as under:
Malkhan Singh And Ors. vs The State Of U.P. And Ors. on 10 December, 1975
"28. The question of the weight to be attached to
the evidence of a witness that was himself injured
in the course of the occurrence has been
extensively discussed by this Court. Where a
witness to the occurrence has himself been
injured in the incident, the testimony of such a
witness is generally considered to be very
reliable, as he is a witness that comes with a
built-in guarantee of his presence at the scene of
the crime and is unlikely to spare his actual
assailant(s) in order to falsely implicate someone.
"Convincing evidence is required to discredit an
injured witness." [Vide Ramlagan Singh v. State
of Bihar, Malkhan Singh v. State of U.P., Machhi
Singh v. State of Punjab, Appabhai v. State of
Gujarat, Bonkya v. State of Maharashtra, Bhag
Singh, Mohar v. State of U.P. (SCC p. 606b-c),
Dinesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, Vishnu v.
State of Rajasthan, Annareddy Sambasiva Reddy
v. State of A.P. and Balraje v. State of
Maharashtra.]
Machhi Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 20 July, 1983
"28. The question of the weight to be attached to
the evidence of a witness that was himself injured
in the course of the occurrence has been
extensively discussed by this Court. Where a
witness to the occurrence has himself been
injured in the incident, the testimony of such a
witness is generally considered to be very
reliable, as he is a witness that comes with a
built-in guarantee of his presence at the scene of
the crime and is unlikely to spare his actual
assailant(s) in order to falsely implicate someone.
"Convincing evidence is required to discredit an
injured witness." [Vide Ramlagan Singh v. State
of Bihar, Malkhan Singh v. State of U.P., Machhi
Singh v. State of Punjab, Appabhai v. State of
Gujarat, Bonkya v. State of Maharashtra, Bhag
Singh, Mohar v. State of U.P. (SCC p. 606b-c),
Dinesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, Vishnu v.
State of Rajasthan, Annareddy Sambasiva Reddy
v. State of A.P. and Balraje v. State of
Maharashtra.]