https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298624 Section 353 CrPC requires evidence to be taken in the presence of the accused, so a criminal decision must rest only on the evidence adduced in that specific case. The appellate court could not import evidence from one connected case into another or dispose of both matters through a common judgment that intermingled the records. That approach was procedurally unsound and contrary to law, so the judgment under challenge was set aside and the connected appeals were directed to be reheard separately in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 17 Mar 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:23:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298624 Section 353 CrPC requires evidence to be taken in the presence of the accused, so a criminal decision must rest only on the evidence adduced in that specific case. The appellate court could not import evidence from one connected case into another or dispose of both matters through a common judgment that intermingled the records. That approach was procedurally unsound and contrary to law, so the judgment under challenge was set aside and the connected appeals were directed to be reheard separately in accordance with law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 17 Mar 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298624