https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302937 Credible eye-witness testimony and surrounding circumstances were found sufficient to sustain the conviction despite objections based on alleged delay in lodging and dispatch of the FIR, non-production of some documents and non-examination of certain witnesses, as no material inconsistency or prejudice was shown. The timing of the fardbayan, inquest report and post-mortem supported the prosecution version. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was held properly applicable because common intention may be inferred from proved circumstances and concerted conduct, without requiring identical acts or an overt act by every participant. The convictions of the accused were therefore maintained. en-us Fri, 30 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:48:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302937 Credible eye-witness testimony and surrounding circumstances were found sufficient to sustain the conviction despite objections based on alleged delay in lodging and dispatch of the FIR, non-production of some documents and non-examination of certain witnesses, as no material inconsistency or prejudice was shown. The timing of the fardbayan, inquest report and post-mortem supported the prosecution version. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was held properly applicable because common intention may be inferred from proved circumstances and concerted conduct, without requiring identical acts or an overt act by every participant. The convictions of the accused were therefore maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302937