Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.02 seconds)
State vs Vikash @ Vicky on 21 July, 2014 cites

Ramanand Yadav vs Prabhu Nath Jha And Ors on 31 October, 2003

46. At the strength of law laid down in Ramakant Rai's case (supra) and Ramanad Yadav's case (supra) it is vehemently argued by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the court should give weight to the ocular evidence of PW6 Veermati and PW8 Rajesh and Sessions Case No. 28/14 Page no. 33 of 35 should ignore the testimony of PW5 Dr. Deepak Kumar Aggarwal and the contents of Ex. PW5/A. I am afraid this contention of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor cannot be accepted. There cannot be any quarrel about the legal position that if the ocular evidence is found reliable, the court can discount the medical opinion. In the present case, however, the testimonies of PW6 Veermati and PW8 Rajesh has been found not reliable and they had reasons to falsely implicate the accused persons. Further the recovery of the weapon of offence is also doubtful.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 171 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next