Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.69 seconds)

Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade & Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 27 August, 1973

ed that the circumstances concerned ‘must or should’ and not ‘may be’ established. There is not only a grammatical but a legal distinction be- tween ‘may be proved’ and “must be or should be proved” as was held by Apex Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra where the following observations were made: [SCC para 19, p.807:SCC (Cri) p.1047] Certainly, it is a primary principle that the accused must be and not merely may be guilty before a court can convict and the mental distance https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 12/24 Crl.A.No.325 of 2020 between ‘may be’ and ‘must be’ is long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 1846 - V R Iyer - Full Document
1   2 Next