https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311754 Conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC could not be sustained where the prosecution evidence was materially unreliable on the genesis, place and manner of occurrence. The informant and injured eyewitnesses gave inconsistent versions on the foundation of the incident, and the evidence was not capable of reliable separation of truth from falsehood without reconstructing a new case. The principle that falsehood in part does not necessarily destroy the whole prosecution case did not assist the State on these facts. The evidentiary defects affecting the co-accused applied equally to the appellant, so the conviction and sentence were set aside. en-us Wed, 04 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:34:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311754 Conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC could not be sustained where the prosecution evidence was materially unreliable on the genesis, place and manner of occurrence. The informant and injured eyewitnesses gave inconsistent versions on the foundation of the incident, and the evidence was not capable of reliable separation of truth from falsehood without reconstructing a new case. The principle that falsehood in part does not necessarily destroy the whole prosecution case did not assist the State on these facts. The evidentiary defects affecting the co-accused applied equally to the appellant, so the conviction and sentence were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 04 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311754