<?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>2017 (7) TMI 1366 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291009</link>
    <description>An objection to the mode of proving electronic call detail records had to be raised when the records were tendered in evidence, because a timely objection would have allowed the defect to be cured; a challenge raised only at the appellate stage was therefore not entertained. On circumstantial evidence, the Court found a complete chain comprising the disappearance of the deceased, ransom communications, recoveries pursuant to disclosure statements, exhumation, medical evidence, and call records linking the accused with each other and with the complainant. Those circumstances were held to be inconsistent with innocence, and the concurrent findings of guilt were affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2023 11:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1366 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291009</link>
      <description>An objection to the mode of proving electronic call detail records had to be raised when the records were tendered in evidence, because a timely objection would have allowed the defect to be cured; a challenge raised only at the appellate stage was therefore not entertained. On circumstantial evidence, the Court found a complete chain comprising the disappearance of the deceased, ransom communications, recoveries pursuant to disclosure statements, exhumation, medical evidence, and call records linking the accused with each other and with the complainant. Those circumstances were held to be inconsistent with innocence, and the concurrent findings of guilt were affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291009</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>