https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311755 Eyewitness evidence to a sudden street occurrence cannot be discarded merely because the witnesses were passersby or chance witnesses, and trivial objections such as absence of an octroi receipt, business details, or immediate rescue effort do not justify rejection of their testimony. The Supreme Court held that the acquittal had been based on an unreasonable appreciation of evidence and was rightly reversed. On common intention, the evidence showed participation by Rana Partap and Sat Pal in restraining the deceased while Manmohan stabbed him, but did not prove beyond reasonable doubt a shared intention to commit murder. Their liability was therefore confined to grievous hurt with common intention, while Manmohan's murder conviction was maintained. en-us Thu, 12 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:27:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311755 Eyewitness evidence to a sudden street occurrence cannot be discarded merely because the witnesses were passersby or chance witnesses, and trivial objections such as absence of an octroi receipt, business details, or immediate rescue effort do not justify rejection of their testimony. The Supreme Court held that the acquittal had been based on an unreasonable appreciation of evidence and was rightly reversed. On common intention, the evidence showed participation by Rana Partap and Sat Pal in restraining the deceased while Manmohan stabbed him, but did not prove beyond reasonable doubt a shared intention to commit murder. Their liability was therefore confined to grievous hurt with common intention, while Manmohan's murder conviction was maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 12 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311755