<?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>1997 (9) TMI 638 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282179</link>
    <description>Homicidal death was proved by medical evidence showing multiple incised injuries, haemorrhage, and shock caused by cutting of the carotid vessels and jugular veins. The injured eyewitness was accepted as reliable because her presence at the scene was established, her injuries were medically supported, and the alleged omissions and contradictions were treated as minor and not affecting the prosecution case. The occupants of the Matador corroborated her account of the assault and its immediate aftermath. Delay in the FIR reaching the Magistrate did not undermine the prosecution version, as the witness consistently stated it was lodged on the day of occurrence. The common object to commit murder and the unlawful assembly were established, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=581133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 638 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282179</link>
      <description>Homicidal death was proved by medical evidence showing multiple incised injuries, haemorrhage, and shock caused by cutting of the carotid vessels and jugular veins. The injured eyewitness was accepted as reliable because her presence at the scene was established, her injuries were medically supported, and the alleged omissions and contradictions were treated as minor and not affecting the prosecution case. The occupants of the Matador corroborated her account of the assault and its immediate aftermath. Delay in the FIR reaching the Magistrate did not undermine the prosecution version, as the witness consistently stated it was lodged on the day of occurrence. The common object to commit murder and the unlawful assembly were established, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282179</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>