Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.21 seconds)Section 57 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 42 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
State Of Punjab vs Baldev Singh on 21 July, 1999
In Baldev Singh case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court had laid
down the rule of caution. However, it is also trite that nonÂjoining
of public witnesses itself can not become a ground for acquittal if
the case of prosecution is otherwise reliable.
State, Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi vs Sunil And Another on 29 November, 2000
This position was reaffirmed
Sessions Case No. 07/2/13 State Vs. Balu Singh & Anr. Page No. 10/24
by the Apex Court in State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Sunil and
Another, (2001) 1 SCC 652, wherein it was held that :
State Of Haryana vs Mai Ram on 31 July, 2008
In State of Haryana v.
Mai Ram, (2008) 8 SCC 292, it was observed that the ultimate
question to be asked is, whether the evidence of the official witness
suffers from any infirmity. The case of the prosecution can not be
held to be vulnerable for nonÂexamination of person who were not
official witnesses. In such cases, if the statements of official
witnesses corroborate the proceedings conducted, the case of the
prosecution can not be disbelieved.