<?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>1957 (4) TMI 59 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173272</link>
    <description>An approver&#039;s evidence must first satisfy the ordinary test of credibility before corroboration is considered; where prior statements and trial testimony are materially inconsistent, the evidence is unreliable and cannot sustain a conviction. A confession recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is usable only if it is voluntary, true, and free from police influence; continued custody, a short interval before recording, and missing safeguards undermined its value here. The remaining circumstantial evidence raised suspicion, but once the approver&#039;s evidence and confession were rejected, it did not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, so the convictions and sentences could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 12:35:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=396733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (4) TMI 59 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173272</link>
      <description>An approver&#039;s evidence must first satisfy the ordinary test of credibility before corroboration is considered; where prior statements and trial testimony are materially inconsistent, the evidence is unreliable and cannot sustain a conviction. A confession recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is usable only if it is voluntary, true, and free from police influence; continued custody, a short interval before recording, and missing safeguards undermined its value here. The remaining circumstantial evidence raised suspicion, but once the approver&#039;s evidence and confession were rejected, it did not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, so the convictions and sentences could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173272</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>