Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.70 seconds)Section 9 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Anil Kumar Gupta, Etc vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors on 28 July, 1995
Learned counsel for the State has also relied upon the
decision of this Court in (2003) 3 SCC 569 : Anil Kumar vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh wherein the Test Identification Parade
was held 47 days after the arrest of the appellants.
Bharat Singh vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 17 December, 1998
Learned counsel for the State submitted that in the instant
case there was no inordinate delay in holding the Test
Identification Parade so as to create a doubt on the genuineness
of the Test Identification Parade. In any event he submitted that
even if it is assumed that there was some delay in holding the
Test Identification Parade, it was the duty of the accused to
question the investigating officer and the Magistrate if any
advantage was sought to be taken on account of the delay in
holding the Test Identification Parade. Reliance was placed on
the judgment of this Court in (1973) 3 SCC 896 : Bharat Singh
vs. State of Uttar Pradesh. In the aforesaid judgment this
Court observed thus :-
Sheikh Hasib Alias Tabarak vs The State Of Bihar on 23 August, 1971
"In Hasib v. State of Bihar AIR
1972 SC 283; it was observed by the
Court that identification parades belong
to the investigation stage and therefore it
is desirable to hold them at the earliest
opportunity. An early opportunity to
identify tends to minimize the chances of
the memory of the identifying witnesses
fading away due to long lapse of time.
Brij Mohan And Others vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 December, 1993
This Court
after considering several decisions of this Court including the
decisions in (1994) 1 SCC 413 : Brij Mohan vs. State of
Rajasthan ; (2001) 3 SCC 468 : Daya Singh vs. State of
Haryana and (2000) 1 SCC 471 : State of Maharashtra vs.
Suresh concluded that since the identifying witness was
attacked by the assailants including the appellant and another,
he had a clear look at the assailants. When his younger brother
came to save him he was killed by the assailants while the
witness also received serious injuries. These were
circumstances which would impress upon the mind of the
witness the facial expressions of the assailants and this
impression would not diminish or disappear within a period of
47 days. Similar was the case of the father and the mother of
the identifying witness who had seen the assailants attacking
their sons and one of their sons getting killed. In their memory
also the facial expressions of the assailants will get embossed.
A mere lapse of 47 days would not erase the facial expressions
from their memory.
Daya Singh vs State Of Haryana on 20 February, 2001
This Court
after considering several decisions of this Court including the
decisions in (1994) 1 SCC 413 : Brij Mohan vs. State of
Rajasthan ; (2001) 3 SCC 468 : Daya Singh vs. State of
Haryana and (2000) 1 SCC 471 : State of Maharashtra vs.
Suresh concluded that since the identifying witness was
attacked by the assailants including the appellant and another,
he had a clear look at the assailants. When his younger brother
came to save him he was killed by the assailants while the
witness also received serious injuries. These were
circumstances which would impress upon the mind of the
witness the facial expressions of the assailants and this
impression would not diminish or disappear within a period of
47 days. Similar was the case of the father and the mother of
the identifying witness who had seen the assailants attacking
their sons and one of their sons getting killed. In their memory
also the facial expressions of the assailants will get embossed.
A mere lapse of 47 days would not erase the facial expressions
from their memory.
State Of Maharashtra vs Suresh on 10 December, 1999
This Court
after considering several decisions of this Court including the
decisions in (1994) 1 SCC 413 : Brij Mohan vs. State of
Rajasthan ; (2001) 3 SCC 468 : Daya Singh vs. State of
Haryana and (2000) 1 SCC 471 : State of Maharashtra vs.
Suresh concluded that since the identifying witness was
attacked by the assailants including the appellant and another,
he had a clear look at the assailants. When his younger brother
came to save him he was killed by the assailants while the
witness also received serious injuries. These were
circumstances which would impress upon the mind of the
witness the facial expressions of the assailants and this
impression would not diminish or disappear within a period of
47 days. Similar was the case of the father and the mother of
the identifying witness who had seen the assailants attacking
their sons and one of their sons getting killed. In their memory
also the facial expressions of the assailants will get embossed.
A mere lapse of 47 days would not erase the facial expressions
from their memory.
Malkhansingh & Ors vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 July, 2003
Learned counsel for the State submitted that having
regard to the principles laid down in the aforesaid decisions it
was open to him to contend that even in the absence of the Test
Identification Parade the conviction of the appellant would be
fully justified on the basis of the evidence of PW-4 alone who
identified him in court. In this case, however, his identification
in court is corroborated by his identification in the Test
Identification Parade.