Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.27 seconds)
State vs . Rajinder Singh Negi & Ors. on 19 March, 2011 cites

State Of Uttaranchal & Anr vs Sunil Kumar Singh Negi on 12 March, 2008

27. Now, the question comes about the identity of the cloth which was recovered. SI K.L. Yadav (PW­22) had taken one Rakesh Kumar (PW­4), an employee of Siddharth Export with him to effect the recovery. First of all, it may be stated that Rakesh Kumar was an employee of Siddharth Export has nowhere been proved by any evidence except that PW­4 Rakesh Kumar himself says that he was working as a labourer with the Siddharth Export. But since his assertion is not being challenged, then SC No. 242/09 29/41 State vs. Rajinder Singh Negi & Ors.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 150 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 July, 1984

18. A reference may also be made to a later decision in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (AIR 1984 SC 1622). Therein, while dealing with circumstantial evidence, it has been held that onus is on the prosecution to prove that the chain is complete and the infirmity or lacuna in prosecution cannot be cured by false defence or plea. The conditions precedent in the words of this Court, before conviction could be based on circumstantial evidence, must be fully established. They are :
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3286 - Full Document
1