Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.53 seconds)

Subedar Tewari vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 3 November, 1988

In the matter of Subedar Tewari vs. State of U.P. and others reported in AIR 1989 SC 733 it had been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the evidence regarding existence of motive which operates in the mind of the assassin is very often than not within the reach of others. The motive may not even be known to the victim of the crime. The motive may be known to the assassin and no one else may know what gave birth to the evil thought in the mind of the assassin. A crime can take place even without premeditation or pre-planning in the context of a particular situation, on the spur of the moment.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 63 - M P Thakkar - Full Document

Promode Dey vs State Of West Bengal on 22 March, 2012

In the matter of Promode Dey vs. State of West Bengal, reported in (2012) 4 SCC 559, it was decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that non-collection of FSL report might be a defect of investigation which could not result in acquittal of an accused against whom enough evidence was available for conviction. This principle has also been repeated and reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex court in a number of decisions time and again. In the instant case, we find from the record that investigating officer though seized bloodstained weapon of offence, blood stained earth, bloodstained apparels etc. but there was nothing on record to show that he ever took any initiative to get those examined in the Forensic Serological Laboratory and collect the FSL report. This shows omission rather negligence on the part of the I.O. and defect in investigation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 19 - A K Patnaik - Full Document
1