Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.79 seconds)Section 25 in The Arms Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Arms Act, 1959
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 326 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Jalpat Rai & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 6 July, 2011
The decision rendered by the Apex Court in Jalpat Rai and others Vs. State of Haryana ( 2012) 3 SCC (Crl.)-1285, placed before us does not support the appellants. The judgment emphasis need for corroboration of evidence of interested/partisan witness from collateral or surrounding circumstances. It has also been held in the aforesaid case that there cannot be a rule of universal application that if the eye witnesses to the incident are interested and /or are deposed inimically towards the accused persons, there should be corroboration of their evidence. The evidence of eye witnesses irrespective of their interestedness, kinship, standing or enmity with the accused, if found credible and of such a calibre as to be regarded as wholly reliable, could be sufficient and enough to bring home the guilt of the accused.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
State Of U.P.,Thru. Secretary, Home & ... vs Ashok Kumar Sharma, on 20 July, 2010
This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.2.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 6, Pilibhit in S.T. Nos. 457 of 2002, State Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma alias Guddu and others, 458 of 2002, State Vs. Navneet alias Bhurey and 459 of 2002, State Vs. Ashok Kumar alias Guddu, by which the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/ 34, 307/34 IPC and section 25, Arms Act and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/- each under Section 302/34 IPC, ten years' RI with fine of Rs. 2000/- each under section 307/34 IPC with default stipulations and two years' RI with fine of Rs. 1000/- to appellants Navneet alias Bhurey and Ashok Kumar Sharma, under section 25, Arms Act with default stipulation. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
1