Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.27 seconds)

Sujeet Singh @ Mukesh Singh @ Mukesh ... vs The State Of Bihar on 29 January, 2016

20 Their testimony further shows that at 12.45am vehicle in question came at out gate being driven by appellant Mukesh. The appellant Sanjeet was helper. No question or suggestion is put to them that the vehicle in question was not being driven by appellant Mukesh with appellant Sanjeet as helper. No question or suggestion is put to them that both of them were not present in the vehicle. No explanation is called from the appellants how they have come into possession of the case property when they have not committed the theft. PW6 is the owner of the vehicle who has categorically   stated   that   appellant   Mukesh   was   the   driver   and Sanjeet   was   helper.   It   is   clear   from   the   record   that   vehicle   in question was in possession of appellants at that time. 21 It   is   clear   from   the   testimony   of   PW3   and   4   that vehicle was checked. 16 bundles of iron wire were found in the Mukesh and Sanjeet vs. State 13 of 17 tool box of the truck trolla. No question or suggestion is put to both of them that no bundle was recovered from the tool box. No question or suggestion is put that no recovery was effected by both of them. No question or suggestion is put to them that they did not inform their senior officers. Their testimony on material points has gone unrebutted which clearly shows that 16 bundles of   iron   wire   were   recovered   from   the   tool   box   of   the   vehicle being driven appellant Mukesh with helper Sanjeet.  22 PW1   has   reached   on   the   spot   on   receipt   of information.   The   matter   was   reported   to   the   police.   PW5 alongwith HC Bahal Singh reached on the spot and carried out the investigation.
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - B P Verma - Full Document
1