Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.53 seconds)

Arvind Kumar @ Nemichand . vs The State Of Rajasthan on 22 November, 2021

In Arvind Kumar @ Nemichand and Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan (supra), the Supreme Court has reiterated that the omission on the part of the prosecution to explain the injuries on the person of the accused, assumes a much greater importance when the evidence consists of interested or inimical witnesses or where the defence gives a version which is antithetical to the story of prosecution.
Supreme Court of India Cites 41 - Cited by 23 - M M Sundresh - Full Document

Emperor vs Khwaja Nazir Ahmed on 17 October, 1944

29. As early as in 1944, the Privy Council in King Emperor vs. Khwaja Najir Ahmad (AIR 1945 P.C. 18) had observed that the receipt and recording of information report by the police is not a condition precedent to the setting in motion of a criminal investigation. Nor does the statute provide that such information report can only be made by an eye witness. FIR under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not even considered a substantive piece of evidence but can only be used to corroborate or Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.900 of 2017 dt. 07-10-2023 15/34 contradict the informant's evidence in Court.
Bombay High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 628 - Full Document
1   2 Next