Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
v.
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
1.4 State v. V.C. Shukla, AIR 1980 SC 1382; State of Haryana v. Ram Singh, AIR 2002 SC 620
“It is the requirement for the Prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.”
2. UNRELIABILITY OF THE WITNESS TESTIMONY
2.1.6. Hari Obula Reddi v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1981(3) SCC 675 and Bijoy Singh v. State of
Bihar 2002(9) SCC 147
Where the witness has a motive to falsely implicate the accused, his testimony should have
corroboration in regard to material particulars before it is accepted. [HISTORY OF ENMITY]
3. WEAKNESSES IN EVIDENCE
4.1.2 State of U.P. v. Banne @ Bajinath and others (2009) 4 SCC 271
“On careful examination of the injuries caused to the accused the High Court observed that
injuries on them (accused persons) were not superficial or minor or self-inflicted. Therefore,
the absence of any explanation by the prosecution about the injuries received by the accused
persons creates serious doubt about the credibility of the entire prosecution version.
According to the High Court, it was the bounden duty and obligation of the prosecution to
have given explanation about the injuries of the accused persons.” The Supreme Court
refused to alter the decision of the High Court.
Submitted By:
Vishav Gupta (1778)