Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 51 (0.71 seconds)
Gurbakhsh Singh vs M A S Pharmaceutical Pvt Ltd And Another on 20 July, 2022 cites

Sheo Swarup vs King-Emperor on 26 July, 1934

In Sheo Swarup v. King Emperor AIR 1934 PC 227, the Privy Council observed as under: (IA p. 404) "... the High Court should and will always give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witnesses; (2) the presumption of innocence in favour of 41 of 52 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 22:17:25 ::: CRM-29941-2017 in CRM-A-2094-MA-2017 -42- the accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial; (3) the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and (4) the slowness of an appellate court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses."
Bombay High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 816 - Full Document

Surajpal Singh And Others vs The State on 20 December, 1951

If the appellate court reviews the evidence, keeping those principles in mind, and comes to a contrary conclusion, the judgment cannot be said to have been vitiated. (See in this connection the very cases cited at the Bar, namely, Surajpal Singh v. State AIR 1952 SC 52; Wilayat Khan v. State of U.P. AIR 1953 SC 122) In our opinion, there is no substance in the contention raised on behalf of the appellant that the High Court was not justified in reviewing the entire evidence and coming to its own conclusions.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 384 - S S Ali - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next