Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 27 (0.33 seconds)Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Arms Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
Section 323 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Arms Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 319 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Balwan Singh vs State Of Haryana on 27 April, 2005
29. Learned senior counsel strenuously urged that the
circumstantial evidence on record clearly disproves the
prosecution case. No blood was found on the spot and there
was absence of blood on the clothes of the person who is said
to have carried the injured. The ballistic evidence completely
rules out complicity of the appellants. He relied upon the
decisions of this Court in the cases of Khima Vikamshi and
others v. State of Gujarat7, Balwan Singh v. State of Haryana8,
Brijpal Singh v. State of M.P.9, Ghurey Lal1, Mahendra Pratap
Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh.10 and Darshan Singh6.
Brijpal Singh vs State Of M.P on 29 April, 2003
29. Learned senior counsel strenuously urged that the
circumstantial evidence on record clearly disproves the
prosecution case. No blood was found on the spot and there
was absence of blood on the clothes of the person who is said
to have carried the injured. The ballistic evidence completely
rules out complicity of the appellants. He relied upon the
decisions of this Court in the cases of Khima Vikamshi and
others v. State of Gujarat7, Balwan Singh v. State of Haryana8,
Brijpal Singh v. State of M.P.9, Ghurey Lal1, Mahendra Pratap
Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh.10 and Darshan Singh6.
Deepak Kumar vs Ravi Virmani & Anr on 1 February, 2002
In this regard, he cited State of
7 (2003) 9 SCC 420
8 (2005) 11 SCC 245
9 (2003) 11 SCC 219
10 (2009) 11 SCC 334
17
U.P. v. Moti Ram and others11, Deepak Kumar v. Ravi Virmani
& Anr.12 and Asif Mamu v. State of Madhya Pradesh.13