Fri. Apr 23rd, 2021

Ajay vs State on 1 June, 2017

1 min read

2. Learned counsels for the appellants contend that a bare reading of the
testimony of the complainant would show that it is full of contradictions; not
only did he fail to identify alleged recovery made by the Police officers, in
his cross-examination the complainant even failed to identify the appellants.
The entire prosecution case is based on the testimony of one single
complainant and since his testimony is not trustworthy, no conviction can
safely be based on the said testimony. The complainant has belied the
version of the Police officers that the arrest was made at his instance and on
his information. The entire prosecution case was concocted to avoid the test
identification parade as the complainant was not in a position to identify the
appellants before the Metropolitan Magistrate. The appellants have been
falsely implicated and thus be acquitted.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply