Kerala HC: Applications under the Muslim Women’s Divorce Act Have a 3-Year Limitation Period  ||  Supreme Court: Property Transferred Before Filing a Suit Cannot be Attached under Order 38 Rule 5  ||  Supreme Court: No Review or Appeal is Maintainable Against an Order Appointing an Arbitrator  ||  SC: Terminated Contract is Not a Corporate Debtor’s Asset and a Moratorium Cannot Revive it  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Complaints Must be Filed at the Payee’s Home Branch under S.142(2)(A)  ||  Supreme Court: Bail Cannot be Granted Solely on Parity; Accused’s Specific Role Must be Assessed  ||  Kerala HC Upholds Life Terms For Five, Acquits Two in Renjith Johnson Murder, Says TIP Not Needed  ||  Kerala HC Orders Emergency Electric Fencing at Tribal School to Address Rising Wildlife Conflict  ||  Madras HC: Arbitrator Can’t Pierce Corporate Veil to Bind Non-Signatory and Partly Sets Aside Award  ||  Calcutta HC: Post-Award Claim For Municipal Tax Reimbursement is Not Maintainable under Section 9    

SC: Courts Should Strike Balance Between Testimony of ‘Injured Witness’ and ‘Interested Witness’ - (20 Mar 2024)

CRIMINAL

Supreme Court has held that it is a well-established principle of law that the evidence of an injured witness is considered to be on a higher pedestal than that of a witness simpliciter and that the Court has to strike a balance between the testimony of the injured witness and that of an interested

Tags : SUPREME COURT   INJURED WITNESS   INTERESTED WITNESS   TESTIMONY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved