https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412803 An omission to formally mark defence or prosecution documents as exhibits does not, by itself, vitiate a criminal trial. Where the accused did not object at trial, the documents were used in cross-examination and under Section 313 CrPC, and no prejudice or failure of justice was shown, the irregularity was treated as procedural only. A retrial or de novo trial remains an exceptional remedy and is not justified for a mere lapse in exhibit marking. The presumption arising from the admitted cheque signature also continued to operate, so the plea that the proceedings were vitiated was rejected and no retrial was warranted. en-us Thu, 16 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 26 Sep 2021 03:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412803 An omission to formally mark defence or prosecution documents as exhibits does not, by itself, vitiate a criminal trial. Where the accused did not object at trial, the documents were used in cross-examination and under Section 313 CrPC, and no prejudice or failure of justice was shown, the irregularity was treated as procedural only. A retrial or de novo trial remains an exceptional remedy and is not justified for a mere lapse in exhibit marking. The presumption arising from the admitted cheque signature also continued to operate, so the plea that the proceedings were vitiated was rejected and no retrial was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412803