সতর্কীকরণ! কেস রেফারেন্স ওয়েবসাইটে প্রকাশিত অধিকাংশ নজীর বিভিন্ন বই ও ওয়েবসাইট থেকে সংগ্রহ করা হয়েছে। এই সকল নজীর এর সঠিকতার বিষয়ে কেস রেফারেন্স ওয়েবসাইট কোন নিশ্চয়তা প্রদান করে না। কেস রেফারেন্স ওয়েবসাইটে প্রকাশিত নজীর এর উপর নির্ভর এর আগে সংশ্লিষ্ট নজীরটির রেফারেন্স মিলিয়ে নেওয়ার অনুরোধ করা হচ্ছে।
Where evidence of parties is unreliable
It is well-settled principle of criminal law that an accused can be convicted only when on the evidence produced the Court is in a position to come to definite conclusion beyond the possibility of reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence with which he stood charged. No conviction can be based on mere possibilities. Nor is it permissible for the Court to speculate as to what had really happened. If both the parties come to Court with untrue facts and conceal the real truth they have themselves to blame and they can not expect the Court to arrive at any definite conclusion on the unreliable evidence produced either for or against either of the parties. In such a case the Court will certainly attempt to separate the grain from the chaff but only if it is possible to do so. That is particularly so when the evidence of both the parties is thoroughly unreliable and cannot be accepted even in part with safety. Om Prakash v. State of U. P., 1982 All WC 89, DB.
Info!
"Please note that while every effort has been made to provide accurate case references, there may be some unintentional errors. We encourage users to verify the information from official sources for complete accuracy."
