https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464676 Conviction under Sections 399 and 402 IPC was set aside because the same basis had already been rejected in the connected matter, so the conviction and sentence could not stand. Conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act was also unsustainable because the alleged recovery of knives was not proved by reliable evidence: the recovery witnesses were inconsistently supported, one material witness turned hostile, other recovery witnesses were not examined, and the testimony contained material contradictions. The appellants were acquitted and the remaining custodial consequences were directed to cease. en-us Tue, 23 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:42:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464676 Conviction under Sections 399 and 402 IPC was set aside because the same basis had already been rejected in the connected matter, so the conviction and sentence could not stand. Conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act was also unsustainable because the alleged recovery of knives was not proved by reliable evidence: the recovery witnesses were inconsistently supported, one material witness turned hostile, other recovery witnesses were not examined, and the testimony contained material contradictions. The appellants were acquitted and the remaining custodial consequences were directed to cease. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 23 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464676