https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173847 In a criminal appeal by special leave under Article 136, the Court ordinarily will not reappraise evidence or disturb concurrent findings of fact unless they are vitiated by legal or procedural error, misreading of evidence, perversity, or grave injustice. On the evidence, natural eye-witness testimony corroborated by medical and recovery material was held sufficient despite the non-examination of some witnesses, as minor discrepancies did not justify rejection of the prosecution case. Identification evidence against one accused was found unsafe because of defects in the test identification process and inadequate corroboration, leading to benefit of doubt for that accused while the remaining convictions were maintained. en-us Fri, 20 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Dec 2018 17:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173847 In a criminal appeal by special leave under Article 136, the Court ordinarily will not reappraise evidence or disturb concurrent findings of fact unless they are vitiated by legal or procedural error, misreading of evidence, perversity, or grave injustice. On the evidence, natural eye-witness testimony corroborated by medical and recovery material was held sufficient despite the non-examination of some witnesses, as minor discrepancies did not justify rejection of the prosecution case. Identification evidence against one accused was found unsafe because of defects in the test identification process and inadequate corroboration, leading to benefit of doubt for that accused while the remaining convictions were maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173847