https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312717 Dying declarations remain substantive evidence of the cause of death and are not excluded merely because every incriminating circumstance was not specifically put to an accused under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; prejudice from an imperfect examination must be independently established. High Court upheld the murder conviction of the identified assailant because eyewitness testimony and the deceased's declarations consistently implicated him. The co-accused were acquitted on benefit of doubt because the deceased's later, more detailed declaration omitted their alleged instigating role, creating a material inconsistency in the prosecution evidence. en-us Tue, 10 Oct 1950 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Mar 2024 15:34:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312717 Dying declarations remain substantive evidence of the cause of death and are not excluded merely because every incriminating circumstance was not specifically put to an accused under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; prejudice from an imperfect examination must be independently established. High Court upheld the murder conviction of the identified assailant because eyewitness testimony and the deceased's declarations consistently implicated him. The co-accused were acquitted on benefit of doubt because the deceased's later, more detailed declaration omitted their alleged instigating role, creating a material inconsistency in the prosecution evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 10 Oct 1950 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312717