Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.76 seconds)
Bhunu Turi & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 August, 2017 cites

Sanjay @ Gulabi Mahto vs The State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) ... on 2 May, 2006

13. Counsel for the appellants further submitted that the entire case rests on the crucial evidence which is the injury report of the doctor. However, this injury report was not proved by any medical doctor or the persons who had written it. Since the doctor who wrote the injury report was not examined, the injury report cannot be considered and then in the absence of injury report or it being not proved by the doctor in any way whatsoever, it cannot be used to convict the appellants and to impose punishment on them. He has referred a judgment reported in 2006(3) JLJR 254 Sanjay @ Gulabi Mahto Vs. State of Bihar ( now Jharkhand) to substantiate this point. In this regard, he has also submitted that the advocate clerk who proved the injury report was not present when this injury report was prepared by the doctor. Even if injury is made as indicated in the injury report from hard and blunt substance and no Bhala or sword or any sharp cutting weapon being used then it cannot be said that offences under sections 307 of the IPC is made out. Moreover, even if the injury report is believed, there seems to be two injury inflicted on the informant one grievous and one simple of which the grievous injury is only on the finger which is not on the vital part of the body and hence the offence under section 307 of the IPC is not made out.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 4 - R R Prasad - Full Document
1