Umapathy @ Kutty, Udayakumar And Kumar @ ... vs State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police on 31 January, 2006
check valve to the evidence of identification in court of an accused by a witness and the same is a rule of prudence
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.76 seconds)Umapathy @ Kutty (A.3) vs State Rep. By The on 31 January, 2006
check valve to the evidence of identification in court of an accused by a
witness and the same is a rule of prudence
Mukesh Mahto Son Of Bodhram Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 February, 2020
check valve to the evidence of identification in court of an
accused by a witness and the same is a rule of prudence
Krishna Singh ? Krishna Kumar Singh ? ... vs State Of Jharkhand on 13 January, 2016
check
value to the evidence of identification in court of an
accused by an witness and the same is rule of prudence
Hemant Kumar Jha vs State Of Jharkhand on 13 January, 2016
check
value to the evidence of identification in court of an
accused by an witness and the same is rule of prudence
Subhash Kumar Jha ? Munna Jha vs State Of Jharkhand on 13 January, 2016
check
value to the evidence of identification in court of an
accused by an witness and the same is rule of prudence
State vs 1 Dharmender @ Ajay, on 12 November, 2009
check
valve to the evidence of identification in
court of an accused by a witness and the
same is a rule of prudence
Naresh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 30 November, 2022
Naresh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 30 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
Suraj Singh vs State Of M.P. on 9 July, 2018
other
evidence. The previous identification in the test identification
parade is a check valve to the evidence of identification in
court of an accused ... becomes minimal so much so that it
becomes, as a rule of prudence and not law, unsafe to rely on
such a piece of evidence
State Of Mah.Thr.L Pso Yavatmal vs Rajendrasingh Bahadur Singh And 4 ... on 27 July, 2018
State Of Mah.Thr.L Pso Yavatmal vs Rajendrasingh Bahadur Singh And 4 ... on 27