<?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>2022 (2) TMI 1299 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305000</link>
    <description>Credible eyewitness testimony may sustain a conviction despite witnesses being related, chance witnesses, or partly hostile, provided their evidence is natural, cogent, trustworthy, and withstands careful scrutiny. Relationship alone does not establish interestedness, and reliable portions of hostile testimony remain admissible for evaluation. Non-examination of every potential witness, including an injured witness or investigating officer, does not by itself vitiate the prosecution where the available evidence proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A final investigation report is not substantive evidence, and delay in forwarding seized articles for forensic examination is not fatal absent demonstrated prejudice where recovery and forensic evidence are duly proved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2023 17:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695365" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1299 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305000</link>
      <description>Credible eyewitness testimony may sustain a conviction despite witnesses being related, chance witnesses, or partly hostile, provided their evidence is natural, cogent, trustworthy, and withstands careful scrutiny. Relationship alone does not establish interestedness, and reliable portions of hostile testimony remain admissible for evaluation. Non-examination of every potential witness, including an injured witness or investigating officer, does not by itself vitiate the prosecution where the available evidence proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A final investigation report is not substantive evidence, and delay in forwarding seized articles for forensic examination is not fatal absent demonstrated prejudice where recovery and forensic evidence are duly proved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>