<?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>1964 (1) TMI 76 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458125</link>
    <description>A non-confessional first information report lodged by the accused was admissible against him as an admission because it contained factual statements relevant to the manner of death and was not barred as a confession to police or as an investigative statement. On the murder charge, the circumstantial evidence formed a complete chain: the accused was last seen with the deceased, gave a false account in the report, failed to explain the disappearance, and offered no satisfactory explanation for the separation. Those circumstances were sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the murder conviction was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2024 11:52:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (1) TMI 76 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458125</link>
      <description>A non-confessional first information report lodged by the accused was admissible against him as an admission because it contained factual statements relevant to the manner of death and was not barred as a confession to police or as an investigative statement. On the murder charge, the circumstantial evidence formed a complete chain: the accused was last seen with the deceased, gave a false account in the report, failed to explain the disappearance, and offered no satisfactory explanation for the separation. Those circumstances were sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the murder conviction was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>