cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
cartridges found at the P.O. were fired by the seized
weapons.
24. The Trial Court had also, according to the
appellants, erroneously relied upon ... confirms that the
empty cartridge cases were fired by the two weapons
seized but how such an impression was arrived at by the
experts remain
weapon and live
cartridges had recovered. In pursuance of the
institution of the criminal case a seizure list was
also prepared and the weapon seized ... Police Official/ Home Guards
was not proved by them and the weapon seized
marked as an exhibit in custody of the Police was
not produced
Brijlala Prasad Sinha @ Brajilala ... vs The State Of Bihar on 28 November, 1997
Equivalent citations
