<?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>1961 (10) TMI 111 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301379</link>
    <description>In an appeal against acquittal, appellate interference is justified only where the acquitting court&#039;s view is clearly unreasonable, and the evidence must be reappraised with special care. A truthful and reliable dying declaration is not a weaker form of evidence merely because it implicates several accused, and corroboration is not an absolute requirement. Applying these principles, the earliest dying declaration of Hazura Singh was accepted as reliable against Harbans Singh, so his conviction was sustained. As to Major Singh, the evidence did not establish that he inflicted the fatal injury and left room for doubt about his role, so his conviction was set aside and acquittal restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Oct 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=674718" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (10) TMI 111 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301379</link>
      <description>In an appeal against acquittal, appellate interference is justified only where the acquitting court&#039;s view is clearly unreasonable, and the evidence must be reappraised with special care. A truthful and reliable dying declaration is not a weaker form of evidence merely because it implicates several accused, and corroboration is not an absolute requirement. Applying these principles, the earliest dying declaration of Hazura Singh was accepted as reliable against Harbans Singh, so his conviction was sustained. As to Major Singh, the evidence did not establish that he inflicted the fatal injury and left room for doubt about his role, so his conviction was set aside and acquittal restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Oct 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301379</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>