Satyendra Rai & Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 31 July, 2014
recognizes a limited use of the case diary either to refresh
memory or to contradict a witness. It can never be used as a
substantive
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.72 seconds)State vs . (1) Manoj @ Lekhraj on 28 April, 2014
deposed that he can tell the number of Ct. Jitender after refreshing
his memory by seeing his mobile phone where the number of Ct. Jitender ... Jitender which he had
earlier saved in his mobile phone.) After refreshing his earlier statement,
the witness has stated that the said number
State vs . (1) Kali Charan on 16 April, 2014
paralytic waist down and it is always open for her
to refresh her memory before her statement is recorded.
(27) According
Fir No. 1083/02; State vs . Hemant Etc. Page 1 Of 81 on 31 March, 2014
Court working at 10 am, he had seen the file to refresh
his memory. PW14 stated that he had gone to search Santraj
State vs Sanjay @ Punty on 24 September, 2014
page 8/12
the time of cross examination, PW1 has not refreshed his memory.
Therefore, they are bound to have some contradictions and the testimony
State vs Kannu on 8 May, 2014
first IO and deposed after refreshing his memory by
going through his statement. He also gave his testimony on the lines of
PW1 till arrest
State vs . (1) Krishnamurthy @ Vicky on 4 August, 2014
State vs . (1) Krishnamurthy @ Vicky on 4 August, 2014
IN THE COURT OF Dr. KAMINI
State vs . 1. Deepak Malik on 9 December, 2014
State vs . 1. Deepak Malik on 9 December, 2014
1
FIR No. 63/06
PS
State vs . (1) Chanderjeet Kumar @ Kishan on 25 August, 2014
State vs . (1) Chanderjeet Kumar @ Kishan on 25 August, 2014
IN THE COURT OF Dr
1