<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1974 (11) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173223</link>
    <description>Abetment under section 107 requires intentional aid given with knowledge of the criminal design; mere facilitation is insufficient. On the facts, Violet&#039;s alleged conduct did not show the requisite intent, so her conviction could not stand. Identification evidence was also found unsafe against Shri Ram, particularly where no identification parade was held despite request and the prosecution evidence was unreliable, so interference with his acquittal was unjustified and his conviction was set aside. By contrast, Sia Ram&#039;s conviction and sentence were upheld because clear, accepted direct testimony attributed the fatal shot to him.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2025 11:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=396592" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (11) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173223</link>
      <description>Abetment under section 107 requires intentional aid given with knowledge of the criminal design; mere facilitation is insufficient. On the facts, Violet&#039;s alleged conduct did not show the requisite intent, so her conviction could not stand. Identification evidence was also found unsafe against Shri Ram, particularly where no identification parade was held despite request and the prosecution evidence was unreliable, so interference with his acquittal was unjustified and his conviction was set aside. By contrast, Sia Ram&#039;s conviction and sentence were upheld because clear, accepted direct testimony attributed the fatal shot to him.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173223</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>