<?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 (2) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199218</link>
    <description>In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court may reappraise the evidence and reverse the acquittal where the trial court&#039;s view is unreasonable, while still respecting the trial court&#039;s advantage in observing witnesses and the presumption of innocence. The commentary states that the High Court was justified in interfering with the acquittal and recording convictions. It also explains that partisan eye-witness testimony can sustain a conviction when the occurrence is witnessed in daylight, the parties are known to each other, and the evidence is corroborated by prompt reporting, medical evidence, and surrounding circumstances. Minor discrepancies and witness relationships do not discredit the core prosecution case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2018 12:07:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510151" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (2) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199218</link>
      <description>In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court may reappraise the evidence and reverse the acquittal where the trial court&#039;s view is unreasonable, while still respecting the trial court&#039;s advantage in observing witnesses and the presumption of innocence. The commentary states that the High Court was justified in interfering with the acquittal and recording convictions. It also explains that partisan eye-witness testimony can sustain a conviction when the occurrence is witnessed in daylight, the parties are known to each other, and the evidence is corroborated by prompt reporting, medical evidence, and surrounding circumstances. Minor discrepancies and witness relationships do not discredit the core prosecution case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199218</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>