Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.26 seconds)
State vs . Jaspal on 30 August, 2019 cites

Kishore Bhadke vs State Of Maharashtra on 3 January, 2017

Relevant para of judgment Kishore Bhadke vs State of Maharashtra (based of last seen evidence) "16. The prosecution has also established the vital circumstances of last seen together. The evidence is given by PW11 & PW12 in particular. Their evidence will have to be juxtaposed with the evidence of PW-15, who has spoken about the telephone call received from Nalini and pursuant to which Raman left his house in her presence with relevant Sessions Case No. 440274/2016 State Vs. Jaspal Page No.19/50 documents/papers. The courts below have accepted her version as truthful and reliable. That evidence cannot be discarded on the basis of some minor discrepancies pointed out during the court of argument. The finding recorded by the two courts below with regard to PW15 about the truthfulness of her version is unexceptional. The evidence of PW11 corroborates the fact that deceased Raman had gone to bank for withdrawing cash amount and then proceeded to the house of Nalini accused No.1. He has deposed that Raman went inside the house of Nalini and saw accused No.2,3,4 and 6 standing near the cattle shed of Nitin Rai. While returning back, he saw accused No.5 standing near the water tank.
Supreme Court of India Cites 35 - Cited by 42 - A M Khanwilkar - Full Document

State Of U. P vs Deoman Upadhyaya on 6 May, 1960

12. Another circumstance that has been proven is about the recovery of knife, blood-stained clothes and the ashes of the burnt blanket. The seizure witnesses Sukha, PW7 and Nanak, PW9 have proven the seizure. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that police had recorded the confessional statement of the accused-appellant at the police custody and thereafter, as alleged, had recovered certain things which really do Sessions Case No. 440274/2016 State Vs. Jaspal Page No.24/50 not render any assistance to the prosecution, for the confession recorded before the police officer is inadmissible. That apart, the accused had advanced the plea that the articles and the weapon were planted by the investigating agency. To appreciate the said submission in proper perspective, we may profitably reproduce a passage from State of UP v Deoman Upadhyaya, AIR 1960 SC 1125:
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 338 - J C Shah - Full Document
1   2 Next