Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.45 seconds)
Datu Ram vs State on 25 January, 1996 cites

Chameli Devi vs State on 19 April, 1993

(5) The parcels were allegedly sealed at the spot by the Investigating Officer and if the Moharer Malkhana is to be believed the same were deposited with him by the said officer. However, the Investigating Officer no where says so. In any case, even if it be taken that the parcels were actually deposited by him, was it not for him to assure the Court that so long as they had remained in his possession they had not been tampered with? This, however, is riot the end of the matter. The Investigating Officer nowhere says that he had filled the C.F.S.L. form nor is there anything, either in his statement or in the statement of the Moharer Malkhana or even in the entry made in the Register, that any such form was ever deposited. The Constable who took the sample parcel also no where speaks of his having deposited any such form with the C.F.S.L. There are judgments of this court in which it has been held that absence of such evidence would be fatal to the prosecution. Reference, in this connection may be made to Chameli Devi v. State, 1993 Jcc 293, Moot Chand v. State 1993 (2) Delhi Lawyer 14, Anoop Joshi v. State 1992 (2) Cc Cases 314, Jagdish Prasad v. State and Munni Lal v. The State 1994 Iv Ad (Delhi) 1099.
Delhi High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 116 - Full Document

Munna Lal vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 17 April, 1963

(5) The parcels were allegedly sealed at the spot by the Investigating Officer and if the Moharer Malkhana is to be believed the same were deposited with him by the said officer. However, the Investigating Officer no where says so. In any case, even if it be taken that the parcels were actually deposited by him, was it not for him to assure the Court that so long as they had remained in his possession they had not been tampered with? This, however, is riot the end of the matter. The Investigating Officer nowhere says that he had filled the C.F.S.L. form nor is there anything, either in his statement or in the statement of the Moharer Malkhana or even in the entry made in the Register, that any such form was ever deposited. The Constable who took the sample parcel also no where speaks of his having deposited any such form with the C.F.S.L. There are judgments of this court in which it has been held that absence of such evidence would be fatal to the prosecution. Reference, in this connection may be made to Chameli Devi v. State, 1993 Jcc 293, Moot Chand v. State 1993 (2) Delhi Lawyer 14, Anoop Joshi v. State 1992 (2) Cc Cases 314, Jagdish Prasad v. State and Munni Lal v. The State 1994 Iv Ad (Delhi) 1099.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 61 - K N Wanchoo - Full Document
1