|
|
|
|
|
|
DEVENDRA SHARMA V/S STATE OF RAJSTHAN A.I. R. 2001 S. C. 93 Circumstantial evidence-- accused absconding from the scene of occurrence sold after co accused was apprehended , revolver from his possession was found when he was arrested, the ballistic report was that the bullet recovered from the body of the deceased could have been fired from the same. The ornaments of deceased recovered from the house of the accused Dr. the accused was held to be rightly convicted for abduction and murder.
STATE OF RAJSTHAN V/S HANUMAN A.I.R. 2001 S. C. 282 Evidence of eye witnesses that accused gave three blows on the head of the deceased with axe, medical evidence that there was only one injury on the head of the deceased with blunt side, and the said injury was sufficient in ordinary course to cause the death, other injuries also found on the face and shoulder. The ocular evidence cannot be discarded on the ground of being in conflict with the medical evidence.
STATE OF W.B. V / S MIR MOHD. OMAR &OTHERS A.I..R. 2000 S.C. 2988 The Postmortem report was clear on the point that the deceased had 45 injuries on the dead body which included fracture of five ribs, fingers, right side of occipital region .However the public prosecutor did not ask the doctor in his examination in chief that whether the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. No doubt it would have been of great advantage to the court if the public prosecutor had put the same question to the doctor when he was examined but mere omission to put that question is not enough for the court to reach on a wrong conclusion .the court himself would have reached to the conclusion that whether the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death
SANJIV KUMAR & OTHERS V/S STATE OF H. P. A I R 1999 S.C. 782 Circumstantial Evidence -- Allegations that accused in furtherance of conspiracy caused murder of the deceased, accused and the deceased last seen together , the witnesses deposed that accused was seen with the blood stained cloths immediately after the occurrence, the weapon of the offence was recovered at the instance of the accused .The chain of circumstances so proved is complete and conviction of the accused for murder is proper
JHARU V/S STATE OF M.P. 1991 J. L. J. 424 [S. C.] Fatal injuries caused by the accused with spear, the use of the spear proved by eyewitnesses, medical evidence also proving the injury of spear on the person of the accused accused rightly convicted for offence of murder
PRBHU V/S STATE OF M.P. 1991 J. L. J. 435 [S. C.] The participation of accused persons proved by direct evidence of my eye witnesses,names of the accused persons disclosed immediately, the intention to kill clear from the injuries inflicted on deceased, the conviction under section 302 is proper. GOKUL V/S STATE OF M P 1988 J L J 49 Presence of injury, nature of injury and the intention to cause the injury to be proved by prosecution
|
|
Copyright © 2001 rajeev bhatjiwale
|
