Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.19 seconds)

State Of T.Nadu Tr.Insp.Of Police vs N Suresh Rajan & Ors on 6 January, 2014

8. On the other hand, counsel for the accused person has opposed the same and has argued that the offence is not proved against the accused persons. It is stated that PW-2 Manoj and PW-11 Pawan were FIR no. 56/07 State Vs. Suresh PS: Kapashera Page 3 of 7 declared hostile by Ld. APP, as they had resiled from their previous statements. Further PW-11 Pawan Pratihast and PW-12 Rohit Ranjan could not identify accused persons in the Court. Hence, they do not support the prosecution case and a benefit of doubt should be given to the accused persons. Further, it is stated that the accused persons have been falsely implicated by the said witnesses. Actually, they came at the spot and when they were asked to show their I-cards, they could not show the same and fled away from the spot. Thereafter, they implicated the accused persons in the present case. This fact has been proved by the testimony of DW-1 Ramesh Chand.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 171 - C K Prasad - Full Document
1   2 Next