AI Overview...
Can Omissions be Marked when Such Omissions are Not Stated in Chief Examination
-
Omissions During Cross-Examination - Omissions or contradictions in witness testimonies can be significant even if not explicitly marked or pointed out during cross-examination. Courts recognize that material omissions during initial testimony may amount to contradictions that warrant scrutiny, especially if they impact the credibility of witnesses Pushpangadhan VS State of Kerala - Kerala, Girish VS State of Karnataka - Karnataka.
-
Implications of Omissions in Evidence - Failure to mark or highlight omissions during cross-examination does not automatically render them irrelevant. Courts have held that the absence of specific marking or questioning about omissions does not negate their importance, and such omissions can be considered in assessing the reliability of evidence Pushpangadhan VS State of Kerala - Kerala, Shashi Mahto VS State of Bihar - Patna.
-
Legal Precedents on Omissions - Judicial decisions emphasize that omissions or contradictions, whether marked or unmarked during cross-examination, are relevant for evaluating the truthfulness of testimonies. For instance, in cases involving witness identification or material facts, omissions can be critical if they reveal inconsistencies or affect the case's integrity Pushpangadhan VS State of Kerala - Kerala, Girish VS State of Karnataka - Karnataka.
-
Investigation and Omission - Investigative lapses or omissions, whether noted during initial investigation or not, can influence the case's outcome. Proper investigation and marking of omissions are vital to maintain confidence in judicial proceedings, but even unmarked omissions during trial proceedings can be considered if they are material Shashi Mahto VS State of Bihar - Patna.
-
Conclusion - Omissions not explicitly marked during chief or cross-examination can still be significant. Courts are empowered to consider such omissions as contradictions or material discrepancies, which can influence the credibility of witnesses and the overall case. The absence of marking does not preclude their relevance in judicial assessment Pushpangadhan VS State of Kerala - Kerala, Girish VS State of Karnataka - Karnataka.
References: - Byri Narayanamma VS Byri Sitharama Murthy - Andhra Pradesh - Joint Action Committee, Protection on Agricultural Land VS Planning and Development Authority, Imphal and others - Gauhati - Shashi Mahto VS State of Bihar - Patna - Pushpangadhan VS State of Kerala - Kerala - XXXX Vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala - Ratan Debnath VS State of Tripura - Gauhati - GANESHGIR, SUKHAGIR VS STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH - Madhya Pradesh - State Of Bihar VS Jhari Sharma, Kailash Singh And Rana Singh - Patna - Lilngala Narender Reddy, Kphb Colony VS State Of A. P. - Telangana - Girish VS State of Karnataka - Karnataka
Search Results for "Can Omissions be Marked when such Omissions are Not Stated in Chief Examination"
2014 0 Supreme(AP) 105 • India - Andhra Pradesh
L.NARASIMHA REDDY, M.S.K.JAISWAL
suggestions in that behalf would have been made to appellant in her cross-examination - Not a word in that behalf was suggested ... child was born in year - They lived together for quite a considerable length of time amicably - Respondent got issued a notice marked ... suggested to her that respondent has seen her living with respondent or that have seen what they have mentioned in their respective chief-examinations ... Even the respondent did not state that he has s....
1997 0 Supreme(Gau) 47 • India - Gauhati
J.N.SARMA, P.K.SARKAR
such act or omission do not wish to claim any relief and accept such act or omissions willingly and without protest. 2. ... President of India, wherein it was held that a member of the public cannot maintain an action challenging the legality of an act or omission ... land to non-agricultural purposes would adversely affect the livelihood of farmers and the long-term economic interests of the state ... On closure examination, I did not find any irrigation canal nearby....
2024 0 Supreme(Pat) 525 • India - Patna
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
of lapses by perfunctory investigation or omissions, faith and confidence of people would be shaken – Where prosecution is fully ... established by direct testimony of eye-witnesses which is corroborated by medical evidence, any failure or omission of Investigating ... Investigating Officer whose investigation is designedly defective – If primacy is given to such designed or negligent investigation, to omission ... P.W. 3 Ritu Devi has stated in her examination-in-chief that the incide....
2004 0 Supreme(Ker) 636 • India - Kerala
JACOB BENJAMIN KOSHY, K.THANKAPPAN
Even though PW 13 in chief examination stated that it belonged to the deceased, in cross examination he stated that deceased had worn many type of watches including ladies watches and he is not remembering any identification marks. ... In chief examination PW 13 stated that the above articles belonged to the deceased, but in cross examination he stated that those articles were not#HL_END....
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 44078 • India - High Court of Kerala
M.R.ANITHA, J
during cross-examination, which the trial court dismissed. ... Ratio Decidendi: Material omissions during initial testimony can amount to contradictions; however, the trial court must comply ... accused in a sexual offence case, filed a petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking to recall victim witnesses to address alleged omissions ... In other words the fact that the omissions were not marked during cross-examination is not at all a reason for re....
1999 0 Supreme(Gau) 267 • India - Gauhati
H.K.SEMA, P.C.PHUKAN
Fact of the Case: The deceased was assaulted and killed in a market, leading to the conviction of the accused appellant ... In the first place, PW 6 did not say in his examination-in-chief that accused Santosh and Ratan chased him, he only said that they threatened him. The Investigating Officer PW 9 in his cross examination was not confronted with these statements to prove the omissions. ... There is nothing in cross-examination of PW 7 from which....
1965 0 Supreme(MP) 59 • India - Madhya Pradesh
N.M.GOLVALKER
The accused raised the objection that the negligence by omission does not come within the scope of section 304-A, Penal Code. ... 1860 - Ss. 304, A,32 & 43 - Mines Act, 1952 - S. 72 C - Coal Mines Registrations, 1957 - Reg.113 - word 'acts - refer to illegal omissions ... that wherever in the Code words refer to "acts" they, unless contrary intention in using those words appears, extract to illegal omissions ... Every such station shall be legibly marked "station" and shall be of such a size as to accom....
2007 0 Supreme(Pat) 850 • India - Patna
ABHIJIT SINHA, CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD
(Para 43) ... Criminal Trial-Examination of witnesses-Non-examination ... regarding identification of dead bodies-Non-examination of the person identifying dead bodies will not make the identification doubtful ... of the same village and there being no reason of their joining the accused persons, such omission is vital and renders their participation ... In paragraph 8 of the cross-examination he has stated that chairs were not kept where he was sitt....
2020 0 Supreme(Telangana) 214 • India - Telangana
G.SRI DEVI
them in evidence of prosecution witnesses, to which they denied – Held, it is evident that there are number of contradictions and omissions ... also abused them by referring their caste name - In that incident, P.W.2 sustained bleeding injury below right eye - It is further stated ... part of P.Ws.1 and 2 as to whether injured (P.W.2) had examined himself before lodging complaint or he has been sent for medical examination ... In the cross-examination, he stated that they went to police station at 9.00 ....
2018 0 Supreme(Kar) 205 • India - Karnataka
RAVI V.MALIMATH, H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
medical evidence read with post-mortem report clearly establishing homicidal death - Evidence of witnesses withstanding test of cross examination ... empowered under Section 156 to investigate - Court not to interfere at an initial stage if it is found that investigation has been ... conducted by an I.O., who did not have any territorial jurisdiction and he ought to have transferred the case to police station ... It ignored the omissions and contradictions elicited in the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2. ... In her e....
Filter by Legal Phrase
