Vinothpandian: 2002 (6)SCC 81 : krishna mochi vs state of bihar : In a trial proceedings , it is the quality of evidence that matters and not the number of witnessess , credible evidence of

[1/7, 12:56] Vinothpandian: 2002 (6)SCC 81 : krishna mochi vs state of bihar : In a trial proceedings , it is the quality of evidence that matters and not the number of witnessess , credible evidence of even a solitary witness can form the basis of conviction
[1/7, 13:00] Vinothpandian: 2004 (12) SCC 336 : damodar vs state of Rajasthan : Any telephonic information about commission of cognizable offence irrespective of nature and details of such information cannot be treated as FIR
[1/7, 13:07] Vinothpandian: 2006 CRI LJ 1622 : Ramesh kumari vs state ( NCT of delhi ) : genuineness or credibility of information not a condition precedent for registration of a case , that can only be considered after registration of the case
[1/8, 10:51] Vinothpandian: 2002(4) crimes 453 : Mohan singh vs prem singh : statements made by accused under sec 313 of CRPC cannot form sole basis of conviction , but effect there of may be considered in the light of other evidences brought on record
[1/8, 11:27] Vinothpandian: 1994 (2) SCC 277 : union of india vs BR bajaj : High court while exercising powers under sec 482 CRPC should not decide the matter as if it was an appeal against judgement of conviction
[1/8, 11:41] Vinothpandian: 2013 (4) crimes 243 : lalita kumari vs govt of UP : Police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering a case if cognizable offence is disclosed
[1/8, 11:59] Vinothpandian: 2007 (9) SCC 516 : PK Arjunan vs state of kerala : when statutory provisions are clear and unambiguous , same should be given its due effect without taking recourse to any technical plea
[1/8, 11:59] Vinothpandian: 2006 (2) SCC 670 : vemareddy kumaraswami reddy vs state of Andhra pradesh : when language of statute is clear and unambiguous court cannot make any addition or substraction of words