Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (1.01 seconds)

State Of Rajasthan vs Smt. Kalki & Anr on 15 April, 1981

Receltly, this difference was reiterated in Ganapathi v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2018) 5 SCC 549, in the following terms, by referring to the three Judge bench decision in State of Rajasthan v. Kalki (supra): "14. "Related" is not equivalent to "interested". A witness may be called "interested' only when he or she derives some benefit from the result of a litigation; in the decree in a civil case, or in seeing an accused person punished. A witness who is a natural one and is the only possible eye witness in the circumstances of the case cannot be said to be "interested".."
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 833 - B Islam - Full Document

Sunil Dutt Sharma vs State (Govt.Of Nct Of Delhi) on 8 October, 2013

In a recent pronouncement in Sunil Dutt Sharma v. State (Govt. Of NCT of Delhi), it has been observed by this Court that the principles of sentencing in our country are fairly well settled- the difficulty is not in identifying such principles but lies in the application thereof. Such application, we may respectfully add, is a matter of judicial expertise and experience where judicial wisdom must search for an answer to the vexed question-whether the option of life sentence is unquestionably foreclosed? The unbiased and trained judicial mind free from all prejudices and notions is the only asset which would guide the Judge to reach the ''truth'."
Supreme Court of India Cites 54 - Cited by 71 - R Gogoi - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next