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

1998 Supreme(All) 692

GIRIDHAR MALAVIYA, J.C.MISHRA
DAYA SHANKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.P.SRIVASTAV, R.B.SAHAI

J. C. MISHRA, J.

( 1 ) WHILE deciding Criminal Appeal No. 2672 of 1981 and 2830 of 1981 on 27-9-1996 we found that the site plan was not prepared on scale, thereby leaving room to the defence to canvass that the fire-arm injuries, found on the body of the deceased, could not be caused from the place, from where, the accused had allegedly fired. In our opinion it is ripe time when the investigation should be made in a scientific manner. The importance of scientific investigation in solving crimes, specially where no eye-witnesses are available and also for testing the statements of witnesses, where they are available, is assuming increasing significance. It has become necessary for the State to take immediate steps for more scientific investigations and reliable medico legal examinations of the injuries-ante or post-mortem and to maintain accurate records.

( 2 ) DESPITE repeated opportunities being given neither the then Additional Advocate General Sri P. P. Srivastava nor the then Director General of Police, who was served with notice nor the learned counsel for the accused has come forward with suggestions for making improvement in investigation, which at present, in our opinion h











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