Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.31 seconds)Section 52 in The Delhi Excise Act, 2009 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
State Of Punjab vs Balbir Singh on 1 March, 1994
MEENA 2025.05.19
16:00:48 +0530
Page 17 of 19
Courts, the omissions / failure on the part of investigating agency
to join independent public witnesses create reasonable doubt in
the prosecution story and substantiates the defence version that
there is false implication of the accused in the present case and
that the recovery has been falsely planted upon the accused.
Further, considering facts and circumstances of the present case
in the light of ratio in State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, AIR 1994
SC, there was no lack of time and opportunity to associate some
independent witnesses with the search and strictly comply with
the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, the above-
mentioned facts create serious doubt on the case of the
prosecution.
Section 165 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Anoop Kumar Joshi vs The State Of Delhi on 12 January, 2017
22. Regarding the importance of joining independent witness
during investigation in a case like the present one, reliance may
be placed on Anoop Joshi Vs. State 1999(2) C.C. Cases 314
Digitally
signed by
ASHISH
ASHISH KUMAR
FIR No: 235/2016 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Satender Kumar ETC. KUMAR MEENA
Date:
Haryana State Lotteries, Iqbal Chand ... vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 17 July, 1998
23. Similarly, in Nanak Chand Vs. State of Delhi reported as
DHC 1992 CRI LJ 55 it is observed as under:-
Safiullah vs State (Delhi Administration) on 9 November, 1992
27. Similarly, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Safiullah v. State, 1993 (1) RCR (Criminal) 622, held that -
Rattan Lal vs State Of Punjab on 10 April, 1964
28. Further, Chapter 22 Rule 49 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 ,
provides that the hour of arrival and departure on duty at or from
a police station of all enrolled police officers of whatever rank,
whether posted at the police station or elsewhere, with a
statement of the nature of their duty shall be entered vide a
separate entry and this entry shall be made immediately on
arrival or prior to the departure of the officer concerned and shall
be attested by the latter personality by signature or seal. In the
present case, all these departures or the arrival entries have not
been proved on the record by the prosecution. In absence of such
proof, the presence of the police officials at the spot cannot be
believed. Reference can be made to on Rattan Lal Vs. State
1987 (2) Crimes 29.