For determination of culpability of each accused there is necessity of parsing evidence carefully in respect of each accused. High court has unnecessarily given weightage to some minor contradictions, which are not material contradictions that can affect the case of prosecution as a whole. The presence of injured witness ought not to have been doubted and being an injured eyewitness, as per the settled proposition of law laid down by this court in catena of decisions, his deposition has a greater reliability and credibility. In this case, deceased was hacked to death with hunting sickles, culpability of the 11 accused (Accused 1 to 11), determined after appreciation of evidence.

[M. Nageswara Reddy v. State of A.P., (2022) 5 SCC 791]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Do not copy the content of this website.

Terms And condition

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising.