Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.20 seconds)Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 380 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 360 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 428 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Amar Singh vs Balwinder Singh & Ors on 31 January, 2003
26. There is no requirement of law that everyone who has witnessed the
occurrence, whatever there number be, must be examined as a witness. (Amar
Singh V. Balwinder Singh (SC) 2003 (1) RCR Criminal 701).
Section 134 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 207 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Sunil Kumar vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 15 October, 2003
25. Regarding the non joining of the other public persons including the father
of complainant or his wife and children who were present at the spot or the
adjoining neighborers, it is well settled principle of law that it is the quality of
evidence that matters and not the quantity/number of witnesses. Section 134 of
the Indian Evidence Act does not require any minimum number of witnesses to
be examined for proving a particular fact ( Sunil Kumar V. State Govt. of NCT
of Delhi SC 2004 (1) Criminal CC 524, Krishna Mochi and others Vs. State
of Bihar, (2002) 6SCC 81). Further the court/judges cannot sit in an ivory tower
of isolation and ignore the fact that there is a tendency amongst witnesses in our
country to wash off their hands/desist from joining/assisting the investigation.
Civilized people withdraw both from the victim and the vigilante and they keep
them selves away from the Court unless it is inevitable.