https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272927 Conviction for abortion-related offences and destruction of evidence was set aside because the prosecution relied on inadmissible and uncorroborated material. The court held that hostile witness testimony, statements under section 164 CrPC, and alleged extra-judicial statements could not, without reliable supporting proof, establish that the appellant performed the abortion or was directly involved in the victim's death. It further held that section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act applies only where a prima facie conspiracy is independently shown and the statements relied on are made during its subsistence; statements made after apprehension did not qualify. The appellant was acquitted for want of cogent admissible evidence. en-us Thu, 18 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 May 2018 06:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272927 Conviction for abortion-related offences and destruction of evidence was set aside because the prosecution relied on inadmissible and uncorroborated material. The court held that hostile witness testimony, statements under section 164 CrPC, and alleged extra-judicial statements could not, without reliable supporting proof, establish that the appellant performed the abortion or was directly involved in the victim's death. It further held that section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act applies only where a prima facie conspiracy is independently shown and the statements relied on are made during its subsistence; statements made after apprehension did not qualify. The appellant was acquitted for want of cogent admissible evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272927