TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (10) TMI 234
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad High Court dt. 10.10.73 setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court on the respondents and acquitting them of the charges framed against them. The leading judgment was delivered by D.S Mathur, J with whom Mohd. Hamid Hussain, J concurred. The details of the prosecution case is to be found in the judgment of the High Court & that of the trial Court and is not necessary t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dence in order to reach the conclusion regarding the credibility of the eye witnesses, who had been examined, to prove the truth of the prosecution case. We have gone through the evidence of PWs 1 and 5 particularly in great detail and we find that their evidence is not only creditworthy but is natural and very straightforward and contain a ring of truth. One of the general ground on which evidenc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s evidence to order to shake his testimony. Furthermore, the evidence of P.W.2 who was not next door neighbour of PWs 1 and 5 corroborates their evidence and we see no reason to discrust his testimony. 2. Reading this situation, Mr. A.N. Mulla, learned Counsel for the respondents, very fairly conceded that it was impossible for him in the state of the evidence to support the judgment of the High ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss If the evidence of PWs 1 & 5 is believed it is not necessary to multiply witnesses to prove the case and thus non-examination of Mt. Sudama does not in our opinion, cast any doubt on the prosecution case. In view, however, of the candid concession made by Mr. Mulla, we do not consider it necessary to go into future details. Mr. Mulla, however, confined his arguments to the question of sentence ....