Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 35 (0.25 seconds)Section 8 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 120B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 364 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 201 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 26 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Mustkeem @ Sirajudeen vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 July, 2011
In Mustkeem alias
Sirajudeen v. State of Rajasthan (supra), the Supreme
Court held that the AB blood group which was found on the
clothes of the deceased does not by itself establish the guilt of
the appellant unless the same was connected with the murder
of the deceased by the appellants therein. None of the
witnesses examined by the prosecution could establish that
fact. The blood found on the sword recovered at the instance
of Mustkeem was not sufficient for test as the same had
already disintegrated. The court was of the view that at any
rate, due to the reasons elaborated in the subsequent
paragraphs, the fact that the traces of blood found on the
deceased matched those found on the recovered weapons
cannot ipso facto enable it to arrive at the conclusion that the
latter were used for the murder. The above decisions would be
squarely applicable to the facts of the present case.
State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) vs Navjot Sandhu@ Afsan Guru on 4 August, 2005
In support thereof, the learned
Public Prosecutor placed reliance upon the decision of the
Supreme Court in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu
alias Afsan Guru (supra) (paragraphs 205, 206), wherein the
court observed that the evidence of the circumstance,
simpliciter, that the accused pointed out to the police officer,
the place where stolen articles or weapons used in the
commission of the offence were hidden, would be admissible
as "conduct" under section 8 irrespective of the fact whether
the statement made by the accused contemporaneously with
or antecedent to such conduct, falls within the purview of
section 27. The court further held that conducting the test
identification parade relates to the stage of investigation and
the omission to conduct the same will not always affect the
credibility of the witness who identifies the accused in the
court.
Kishore Amarsingh Maheshkar, Ravindra ... vs The State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 August, 1998
6.5 The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Ravindra alias Ravi Bansi Gohar v. State of
Maharashtra and others, (1998) 6 SCC 609, was cited for
Page 8 of 54
R/CR.A/1722/2012 JUDGMENT
the proposition that the identification parades belong to the
investigation stage and they serve to provide the investigating
authority with materials to assure themselves if the
investigation is proceeding on the right lines. In other words, it
is through these identification parades that the investigating
agency is required to ascertain whether the persons whom
they suspect to have committed the offence were the real
culprits - and not by showing the suspects or their
photographs. Such being the purpose of identification parades,
the investigating agency, by showing the photographs of the
suspects whom they intended to place in the TI parade, made
it farcical. If really the investigating agency was satisfied that
the witnesses did know the appellants therein from before and
they were in fact amongst the miscreants, the question of
holding the TI parade in respect of them for their identification
could not have arisen. The court held that a vital factor for
determining the value of an identification parade is the
effectiveness of the precautions taken by those responsible for
holding them against the identifying witnesses having an
opportunity of seeing the persons to be identified by them
before they are paraded with other persons and also against
the identifying witnesses being provided by the investigating
authority with other unfair aids or assistance so as to facilitate
the identification of the accused concerned. The court
observed that in the facts of the said case, not only the
photographs of the appellants therein and other accused were
shown before the TI parades, but they were held in the lock-up
of the investigating agency, thereby giving sufficient
opportunity to the identifying witnesses of seeing the persons
to be identified. It was submitted that the above decision
would be squarely applicable to the facts of the present case.