Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (0.53 seconds)

Balraje @ Trimbak vs State Of Maharashtra on 10 May, 2010

"The evidence of an injured witness must be given due weightage being a stamped witness, thus, his presence cannot be doubted. His statement is generally considered to be very reliable and it is unlikely that he has spared the actual assailant in order to falsely implicate someone else. The testimony of an injured witness has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence and this lends support to his testimony that he was present during the occurrence. Thus, the testimony of an injured witness is accorded a special status in law. The witness would not like or want to let his actual assailant go unpunished merely to implicate a third person falsely for the commission of the offence. Thus, the evidence of the injured witness should be relied upon unless there are grounds for the rejection of his evidence on the asis of major contradictions and discrepancies therein. (Vide: Jamail Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2009) 9 SCC 719, Balraje @ Trimbak Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2010) 6 SCC 673, and Abdul Sayed VS. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2010) 10 SCC 259)"
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 291 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Dinesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 4 August, 2008

Injured witnesses would definitely not shield the real culprits of the crime, and name somebody else because of enmity. The defence did not ask the injured witnesses as to how they received the injuries mentioned in the medical reports. (See: Dinesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, (2008) 8 SCC 270; Arjun Mahto v. State of Bihar, (2008) 15 SCC 604; and Akhtar and Ors. v. State of Uttaranchal, (2009) 13 SCC 722)."
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 131 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next