It is settled principle of law that benefit of reasonable doubt is required to be given to the accused only if the reasonable doubt emerges out from the evidence on record
Selvaraj @ Chinnapaiyan vs State represented by Inspector of Police
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 892 OF 2009
About/from the judgment:
It is settled principle of law that benefit of reasonable doubt is required to be given to the accused only if the reasonable doubt emerges out from the evidence on record. Merely for the reason that the witnesses have turned hostile in their cross-examination the testimony in examination-in- chief cannot be outright discarded provided the same (statement in examination-in-chief supporting prosecution) is corroborated from the other evidence on record. In other words if the court finds from the two different statements made by the same accused only one of the two is believable and what has been stated in the cross-examination is false even if the witnesses have turned hostile the conviction can be recorded believing the testimony given by such witnesses in the examination-in-chief. However such evidence is required to be examined with great caution.
Read the Judgment
Knowledge and content of about almost all their respective descriptions are borrowed from law-related blogs and websites, we, therefore, wish to give proper credit to all the respective law-related blogs and websites like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, LatestLaws, PathLegal, FirstLaw, Lawctopus, IndianKanoon, Manupatra, LegallyIndia etc.. Many of the judgments are also taken from them websites of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other respective Hon'ble High Courts!