Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.23 seconds)Section 338 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 337 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 281 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Rathnashalvan vs State Of Karnataka on 11 January, 2007
The
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rathnashalvan vs. State of
FIR No. 748/2014, PS Dwarka South State v. Sanjay Kumar Goel Page 15 of 22
Karnataka (2007) 3 SCC 474 has observed, inter alia, as
under-:
Abdul Subhan vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 27 September, 2006
In the site plan vide Ex.PW1/B, it is merely pointed
out that the accident had taken place at point A. In the case
titled Abdul Subhan vs State (NCT of Delhi)" 2006 (4) LRC
472 (Del), it was held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi,
"The burden of proving everything essential to the
establishment of the charge against an accused always rests
on the prosecution and there is a presumption of innocence in
favor of the accused until the contrary is proved. Criminality
is not to be presumed, subject of course to some statutory
exceptions. There is no such statutory exception pleaded in
the present case. In the absence of any material on the
FIR No. 748/2014, PS Dwarka South State v. Sanjay Kumar Goel Page 18 of 22
record, no presumption of "rashness" or "negligence" could
be drawn by invoking the maxim "res ipsa loquitor"."
It was further observed, "As a rule, photographs ought to be
taken not only of the vehicle involved in the collision but also
of the site and surrounding areas so that the exact
topography can be easily discerned by courts. The prevalent
weather conditions must be noted by the investigating officer.
This would go on to establish as to whether the road was
slippery due to rain; whether there was poor visibility due to
fog or mist etc. Furthermore, the path of movement of the
vehicles must be sought to be established in the course of
investigation and not be left open to ambiguity and doubt as
in the present case.......Proper investigation of such accident
would go a long way in aiding the criminal justice system in
convicting those who are guilty and acquitting those who are
innocent. A shoddy investigation will only point in one
direction and that is in the acquittal of all whether they are
guilty or whether they are innocent. Because no criminal
court would and ought not convict any person merely on the
basis of conjectures, assumptions, probabilities, all elements
of subjectivity need to be eliminated."
Sushil Ansal vs State Thr.Cbi on 5 March, 2014
17.Similar observations were made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Sushil Ansal vs. CBI (2014) 6 SCC 173.
The standard of negligence was discussed in the said case, by
observing, inter alia, as under-: