<?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>1969 (5) TMI 63 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461879</link>
    <description>A witness cannot be treated as an approver without proof of a tender of pardon under Section 337 CrPC; absent such proof, the witness remains an accomplice. Accomplice evidence must be assessed with caution and can sustain a conviction only if it is credible and corroborated on material particulars by independent evidence. Here, the footprint evidence was found unreliable because the moulds and shoes were left unsealed and sent for expert comparison after an unexplained delay, weakening its evidentiary value. On that basis, Bahadur Singh&#039;s testimony was not sufficiently reliable or corroborated, the conviction could not be sustained, and both accused were acquitted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 16:52:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=819892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (5) TMI 63 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461879</link>
      <description>A witness cannot be treated as an approver without proof of a tender of pardon under Section 337 CrPC; absent such proof, the witness remains an accomplice. Accomplice evidence must be assessed with caution and can sustain a conviction only if it is credible and corroborated on material particulars by independent evidence. Here, the footprint evidence was found unreliable because the moulds and shoes were left unsealed and sent for expert comparison after an unexplained delay, weakening its evidentiary value. On that basis, Bahadur Singh&#039;s testimony was not sufficiently reliable or corroborated, the conviction could not be sustained, and both accused were acquitted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>