Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.23 seconds)
State vs Chuttan Lal on 2 September, 2023 cites

Abdul Subhan vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 27 September, 2006

d. Additionally, certain discrepancies have also crept in the case of the prosecution as discussed hereinafter. Firstly, the site plan seems to have been prepared by the IO in a very perfunctory manner, without disclosing the actual state of affairs as led to the collision between the vehicles in question. Nowhere State Vs. Chuttan Lal Page Nos.16 / 19 does the site plan Ex. PW 4/B show the direction from which the offending vehicle was coming, or the direction in which the vehicle of the complainant was moving. Further, the site plan has admittedly not been prepared by the IO at the instance of the victim which is a material dereliction on part of the IO and thus, the portrayal of facts thereupon cannot be relied upon as being the apt and proper depiction thereof. The genuineness and correctness of the preparation of site plan is thus clouded with suspicion. Much importance has been rendered to proper preparation of site plan of the spot in cases of accident by various Hon'ble High Courts and the Hon'ble Apex Court, with one such ruling relied upon, being, Abdul Sudhan Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2006 Delhi HC. The aforesaid lacunae create a fatal dent in the prosecution story, rendering the version of the complainant as well as the prosecution improbable.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 1083 - B D Ahmed - Full Document

Dilawar Singh vs State Of Delhi on 5 September, 2007

a. First and foremost, it is pertinent to note that there is a delay of about one and half days in the registration of FIR in State Vs. Chuttan Lal Page Nos.11 / 19 the present case as, the date of incident is reported to be 28.03.2021 at around 01:30 PM, while the FIR came to be registered only on 29.03.2021 at about 08:45 PM. Now, while the IO deposed that the victim could not give his statement on the very first day as he was in pain owing to his injuries, the same is not corroborated by record in as much as it is not the case of the prosecution that the doctor had declared the victim unfit for giving his statement on 28.03.2021 itself. Thus, there is nothing on record to show that the victim was not in a medically fit condition to give his statement on the very first day itself. This discrepancy has thus remained unexplained on behalf of the prosecution. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as Dilawar Singh vs State Of Delhi (2007 SC):
Supreme Court of India Cites 41 - Cited by 344 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next