Vs.
EmailAppeal:
Petitioner:
Respondent:
Apeal:
Judges:
Date of Judgment: Feb 15, 2000
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
Section 3 – Appreciation of evidence – Murder of lawyer – Occurrence wit-nessed by junior counsel – Presence doubted – Blood group of deceased was ‘O’ – Blood stain on the shirt of junior counsel of ‘B’ group – Exhibits sent late – Other substantive evidence available. Held that there was no ground to disbelieve the pres-ence on that count.
Section 3 – Appreciation of evidence – Murder of lawyer – Occurrence wit-nessed by junior counsel – Presence doubted – Blood group of deceased was ‘O’ – Blood stain on the shirt of junior counsel of ‘B’ group – Exhibits sent late – Other substantive evidence available. Held that there was no ground to disbelieve the pres-ence on that count.
Held:
While lifting the injured body of the deceased the shirt of PW-6 stained with blood of the deceased. Deceased had blood of ‘O’ group but on the shirt of PW6 blood was found of ‘B’ group. The shirt of PW-6 along with other exhibits lifted from the place of occurrence was received by C.F.S.L on 24.07.91 and in view of this inordinate delay detection of ‘B’ blood group on the shirt of PW-6 cannot destroy the other evidence available to support the contention of the prosecution that PW-6 was present and saw the occurrence. Presence of P.W. 6 at the time of occurrence cannot be doubted. (Para 15)
JUDGEMENT:
