Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.23 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Mohd. Aslam vs State Of Maharashtra on 27 April, 2000
"Where the evidence of the investigating
officer who recovered the material objects is
convincing, the evidence as to recovery need not be
rejected on the ground that seizure witnesses did
19 SC 364/2012
not support the prosecution version. Similar view
was expressed in Mohd. Aslam vs. State of
Maharashtra, (2001) 9 SCC 362.
Anter Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 February, 2004
In Anter Singh vs.
State of Rajasthan, (2004) 10 SCC 657, it was
further held that even if panch witnesses turn
hostile, which happens very often in criminal cases,
the evidence of the person who effected the
recovery would not stand vitiated."
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Rameshbhai Mohanbhai Koli & Ors vs State Of Gujarat on 20 October, 2010
In this regard, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Rameshbhai Mohanbhai Koli & Ors vs State Of Gujarat reported
in (2011)11 SCC 111, observed as under:-
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Modan Singh & Anr. vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 August, 2015
24. Hon'ble Apex Court further in the case of Modan
Singh vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (1978) 4 SCC 435,
observed that:-
1