Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.51 seconds)
Palanisamy M/A 50 Years vs The Inspector Of Police on 8 December, 2016 cites

Shantabai & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 3 March, 2008

14. In the instant case, then, we could have placed some reliance on the recovery, had the prosecution at least proved that the blood was of human origin. As observed supra, while discussing the evidence of PWs 9 and 16, the prosecution has tried to concoct the case from stage to stage. Hence, in the absence of positive material indicating that the stained blood was of human origin and of the same blood group as that of the accused, it would be difficult for the Court to rely upon the aspect of recovery of the weapons and tabbal, and such Page 16 of 23 http://www.judis.nic.in Criminal Appeal No.753 of 2017 recovery does not help the case of the prosecution.” 18.7.Similarly in Shantabai and others Vs. State of Maharashtra ((2008) 16 Supreme Court Cases 354), the following observation has been made.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 41 - L S Panta - Full Document

N.J.Suraj vs State Rep. By Inpsector on 28 October, 2002

In N.J. Suraj v. State represented by Inspector of Police (2004) 11 SCC 346, the prosecution case was based entirely upon circumstantial evidence and a motive. Having discussed the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, this Court rejected motive which was the only remaining circumstance relied upon by the prosecution stating that the presence of a motive was not enough for supporting a conviction, for it is well-settled that the chain of circumstances should be such as to lead to an irresistible conclusion, that is incompatible with the innocence of the accused.
Madras High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 23 - N Dhinakar - Full Document
1   2 Next