Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.31 seconds)The Police Act, 1983
Section 342 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Santosh Namdev Patil vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 19 January, 2012
22. Testimonies of Mst. Neena and Mst. Praveen who
withstood the test of cross examination and whose credit could
not be impeached in the least are corroborative in character and
the same cannot be discarded merely because these witnesses
are closely related to Mst. Ruby. It is well settled that related is
not equivalent to interested. It was held in Namdev vs. State of
Maharashtra reported in 2007 Sc (1):-
Section 6 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Bhimapa Chandappa Hosamani And Others vs State Of Karnataka on 20 September, 2006
15. The credibility of the witness should be tested with
reference to the quality of his evidence which must be above
board, unblemished and beyond suspicion. The testimony of
solitary eye witness must impress the Court as being
natural, fully truthful and convincing. Such testimony must
inspire confidence of such a degree that the Court finds no
hesitation in recording the conviction solely on his
uncorroborated testimony. This exposition of law was made
by Honble Apex Court in Thimoepa Chandappa vs. State of
Karnataka reported in (2006) 11 SCC 323.