<?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>1979 (7) TMI 246 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198359</link>
    <description>Hostile prosecution witnesses are not to be rejected wholesale if parts of their evidence remain trustworthy, and the court may rely on the credible portion. In criminal prosecution for rash or negligent driving, res ipsa loquitur cannot shift the burden from the prosecution to the accused; it may only assist in drawing inferences from proved facts. Applying that standard, the circumstances showed a sudden road entry by the child, an attempted swerve to avoid impact, and an instantaneous error of judgment rather than culpable negligence. The prosecution therefore failed to prove rash or negligent driving beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (7) TMI 246 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198359</link>
      <description>Hostile prosecution witnesses are not to be rejected wholesale if parts of their evidence remain trustworthy, and the court may rely on the credible portion. In criminal prosecution for rash or negligent driving, res ipsa loquitur cannot shift the burden from the prosecution to the accused; it may only assist in drawing inferences from proved facts. Applying that standard, the circumstances showed a sudden road entry by the child, an attempted swerve to avoid impact, and an instantaneous error of judgment rather than culpable negligence. The prosecution therefore failed to prove rash or negligent driving beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198359</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>