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

1992 Supreme(MP) 458

D.K.JAIN
Tularam. – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P – Respondent


JUDGMENT

It is true that the independant witnesses Mangal (PW 2) and Ram Sewak (PW 3) have not corroborated the version of Food Inspector O.P. Rai (PW 1) but corroboration is not necessary in each and every case because conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a single witness if his version appears to be reliable in all respect. If the label on the bottle in which the sample of ground-nut oil was taken did not bear the signature of the accused, on this count alone, the prosecution case cannot be thrown out. Besides this from the version of Food Inspector O.P. Rai, it stands proved that he had taken the sample of ground nut oil as per rules and that on the wrapper he had obtained the signatures of the witnesses an behalf of the applicant it was submitted that the applicant had applied for getting his signature examined by the hand-writing expert but his application was wrongly disallowed by the trial Court. It is true that the Trial Court has disallowed the application moved on behalf of the applicant for getting his signatures examined by a hand writing expert but the "Trial Court did not think it necessary to allow this application because the applicant had admitted hi






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