Judgments
Prasanna Kumar and another Versus State of M.P.
Law laid down - None explanation of injuries to the accused or to the deceased with a particular weapon is not always fatal, if there is specific ocular evidence. Section 149 of IPC makes every member of an unlawful assembly at the time of committing the offence guilty of that offence on the principle of constructive liability. In the case of inconsistency between medical evidence and ocular evidence priority has to be given to ocular evidence ignoring the minor discrepancies. Full Judgment
Nasiruddin & Anr. Etc. VERSUS The State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary
PRATEEK GUPTA VERSUS SHILPI GUPTA & ORS
Referred Cases 1, Surya Vadanan vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. 2, DHANWANTI JOSHI Vs. MADHAV UNDE 3, Mrs. Shilpa Aggarwal Vs. Mr. Aviral Mittal & Anr. 4, MRS. ELIZABETH DINSHAW Vs.ARVAND M. DINSHAW AND ANR. 5, SYED SALEEMUDDIN Vs. DR.RUKHSANA & ORS 6, Arathi Bandi VERSUS Bandi Jagadrakshaka Rao & Ors Full Judgment
CANARA BANK AND ANOTHER VERSUS LALIT POPLI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS
Smt. Syed Sughra Zaidi Versus Laeeq Ahmad (Dead) Through LRs. & Ors
ATMA RAM PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
H. N. Jagannath & Ors. Versus State of Karnataka & Ors
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HYDROCARBONS OF INDIA Vs. OVERSEAS DRILLING LIMITED
Amar Singh Kamria and Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
Law Laid Down - 1. An application u/s 319 Cr.P.C is entertainable only when implicative evidence (documentary or oral) having probative value more convincing than grave suspicion is brought on record during trial. The other pieces of evidence which have already been brought on record between the stages of taking cognizance and the commencement of trial can be used only for corroborative purpose. Meaning thereby that if any evidence is considered during the investigative process and is not brought on record Full Judgment