https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281561 In custodial death cases, a test identification parade is not substantive evidence, but where a witness is a stranger and prior identification is absent, corroboration is ordinarily expected as a rule of prudence. On the facts discussed, the conviction of one accused was sustained because the prosecution evidence was supported by medical material, the surrounding circumstances, and the falsity of the defence, establishing culpability for death caused by injuries and the combined effect of alcohol and trauma. The remaining accused were entitled to acquittal because the eyewitness versions were contradictory, their identification was unreliable, and individual guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. en-us Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:22:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281561 In custodial death cases, a test identification parade is not substantive evidence, but where a witness is a stranger and prior identification is absent, corroboration is ordinarily expected as a rule of prudence. On the facts discussed, the conviction of one accused was sustained because the prosecution evidence was supported by medical material, the surrounding circumstances, and the falsity of the defence, establishing culpability for death caused by injuries and the combined effect of alcohol and trauma. The remaining accused were entitled to acquittal because the eyewitness versions were contradictory, their identification was unreliable, and individual guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281561