state. Moreover, the witness was entitled to refresh his memory and if his memory was refreshed, it does not amount tutoring. Perusal of entire evidence
State. PW4 is Trilok who was allowed to refresh his memory and
even after refreshing the memory he was resiling from his earlier
statement ... Perusal of evidence reveals that PW4 Trilok was allowed to
refresh his memory who was again resiling from his earlier statement
and was cross examined
trial to prove the injuries of the injured person. He could refresh his memory under Section 159 , Evidence Act by referring to the injury report
read over to him at his request for the purpose of refreshing his memory, he gave the said statement merely and just to support
they are used
by the police officer who made them to refresh his
memory, or if the Court uses them for the purpose
of contradicting
than the Police Officer. The investigating
officer has a right to refresh his memory and can refer to Case Diary
and the accused is vested
failed
to recollect the incident which occurred in 1989 without
refreshing his memory with reference to the injury report. He
could not identify the person
that he gave his
statement after refreshing his memory. He further denied the suggestion that
accused persons had been falsely implicated in the present case
seize her blood stained clothes. She admitted
that she refreshed her memory through IO before deposing
in the court. She denied the suggestion that accused
that he joined the
investigation with the investigating officer. This witness refreshed his
memory by going through his earlier statement recorded by the
investigating officer