Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.27 seconds)Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
State Of Rajasthan vs Tejaram on 5 September, 1985
In State of Rajasthan v. Tejaram and others 2,
in paragraph 25, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Failure of the
serologist to detect the origin of the blood due to disintegration of the serum
in the meanwhile does not mean that the blood stuck on the axe would not
have been human blood at all. Sometimes it happens, either because the
stain is too insufficient or due to haematological changes and plasmatic
coagulation that a serologist might fail to detect the origin of the blood. The
effort of the criminal court should not be to prowl for imaginative doubts.
Unless the doubt is of a reasonable dimension which a judicially
conscientious mind entertains with some objectivity, no benefit can be
claimed by the accused.
Raju vs The State, By Inspector Of Police on 19 February, 2009
The Supreme Court in (2009) 11 SCC 111 (Raju v. State by Inspector of
Police) again has reiterated the circumstances which require to complete a
chain of circumstances for convicting the accused and held that a conviction
can be based solely on circumstantial evidence if the circumstances are
tested by the touchstone of the law relating to circumstantial evidence
whereby the chain of events would clearly draw inference of the guilt being
cogent and firmly established and the guilt also is unerringly pointed out
towards the accused and the circumstances also lead us to the only
conclusion that the accused is incapable of giving proper explanation to any
other hypothesis.
Section 8 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Molai And Anr vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 October, 1999
In Molai and Another v. State of M.P. 1 it was laid down
that presence of human blood on knife which was recovered at the instance
of the accused, even if the blood group was not determined, was an
incriminating circumstance.
1