SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(SC) 154

BAHARUL ISLAM, V.D.TULZAPURKAR
Soni – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


V.D.Tulzapurkar, J.

(1) SPECIAL leave granted.

(2) AFTER hearing counsel on either side we are satisfied that the conciction of the appellant for the offence of dacoity is difficult to sustain. The conviction rests purely upon his identification by five witnesse, Smt. Koori Pritam Singh, Kewal, Chaitoo and Sinru, but it cannot be forgotten that the identification parade itself was held after a lapse of 42 days from the dare of the arrest of the appellant. This delay in holding the identification parade throws a doubt on the genuineness thereof apart from the fact that it is difficult that after lapse of such a. long time the witnesses would be remembering the racial expressions of the appellant. If this evidence cannot be relied upon there is no other evidence which Can sustain the Conviction of the appellant. We therefore allow the appeal and acquit the appellant.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top