Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.33 seconds)Section 279 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 337 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 338 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
M.Subramani vs State Represented By on 16 March, 2011
In M.Subramani Vs. State reported in MANU/TN/3138/2016,
this Court held that merely because the vehicle was being driven at
a “high speed” does not speak of either negligence or rashness by
itself. In the absence of any material on record, no presumption of
rashness or negligence could be drawn by invoking the maxim “res
ipsa loquitur”. Therefore, he prayed to acquit the petitioner herein.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Balamurugan vs State Represented By on 8 September, 2020
6.In support of his contention, he also cited the
Judgment of this Court in Balamurugan Vs. The State reported in
(MANU/TN/3659/2021) and held that the criminal jurisprudence
says that unless there is a statutory burden, it is always on the
prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused and prove its case
beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution should let in evidence
to prove that the ingredient necessary for a particular offence is
made out. Merely because there was an accident and that two
persons have lost their lives, the burden cannot be shifted on the
accused to prove his innocence and there can be no presumption
that the accused drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner.
1