Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.19 seconds)

Cash Register Co. (P) Ltd. Now Known As ... vs Suraj Narayan Shaw And Ors. on 9 August, 2002

11. All the witnesses were cross examined. PE was closed vide order dated 25.02.2020. Thereafter, the accused persons were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. read with section 281 Cr.P.C, FIR No. 137 of 2018 State Vs. Suraj & Ors PS Patel Nagar Page No. 5 of 9 wherein they denied all the incriminating evidence against them. The accused persons chose not to lead evidence in their defence.
Calcutta High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Anoop Kumar Joshi vs The State Of Delhi on 12 January, 2017

"18. It is repeatedly laid down by this Court in such cases it should be shown by the police that sincere efforts have been made to join independent witnesses. In the present case, it is evidence that no such sincere efforts have been made, particularly when we find that shops were open and one or two shopkeepers could have been persuaded to join the raiding party to witness the recovery being made from the appellant. In case any of the shopkeepers had declined to join the raiding party, the police could have later on taken legal action against such shopkeepers because they could not have escaped the rigors of law while declining to perform their legal duty to assist the police in investigation as a citizen, which is an offence under the IPC."
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 2089 - P S Teji - Full Document
1