Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.23 seconds)
State vs Devender Pal on 10 March, 2026 cites

State Of Punjab vs Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar & Ors.Etc on 7 December, 2011

11. Coming now to the facts of the case, prosecution has cited several witnesses including one public witness i.e. the complainant himself. As the complainant was eyewitness of the alleged offence, he would have been the best witness to this FIR No. 207/2016 PS Welcome titled as State v. Devinder Pal 5/7 Digitally signed by DEEPAKSHI DEEPAKSHI RANA RANA Date: 2026.03.10 16:32:49 +0530 case, however, to the utter dismay of prosecution, he unfortunately passed away and hence was dropped from the list of witnesses. Rest of the witnesses cited by the prosecution were only formal witnesses, who played some part in the investigation but were not first hand witnesses to the alleged incident. Thus, the guilt of the accused person could not have been proved by the prosecution from the mere testimony of said formal witnesses inasmuch as, the alleged incident was never committed in their presence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 117 - Cited by 1099 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Sh. Satish Mehra vs Delhi Administration & Anr on 31 July, 1996

In the present matter, rest of the witnesses were also dropped from list of witnesses at request of Ld. APP for the state as complainant has already been dropped and IO had already been examined as in Satish Mehra Vs Delhi Administration & Anr. 1996 JCC 507 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that valuable time of the court should not be wasted merely for formal completion of procedure, when there is no chance of the trial culminating in conviction. Hence, rest of PWs were dropped from list of witnesses. For a quick perusal, the documents exhibited by the examined witnesses on record are listed below:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 2043 - Full Document
1