Back

Joginder Singh v. State of Haryana — Ballistic report vs. oral evidence

Part of the Forensic Docket on Legal Desire Forensics — a case where forensic or identification evidence broke down on appeal.

The facts

The trial court had acquitted all three accused, citing material contradictions between the oral evidence and the ballistic report and the non-examination of material witnesses.

The Supreme Court held the High Court had unsettled those reasonable findings in a cryptic manner and restored the acquittal.

Why this belongs in the Forensic Docket: A ballistic contradiction the trial court took seriously does not stop mattering just because a higher court wants to convict.

Case details

Citation [2013] 11 S.C.R. 446
Case number Criminal Appeal No. 1148/2007
Court Indian Supreme Court
Decided 2013
Module Failure Registry

Read the full judgment (PDF), sourced from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (AWS Open Data Registry, CC-BY-4.0).

Explore more in the Forensic Docket or browse the full Forensics hub.

LEGAL DESIRE NEWSLETTER

Where the legal industry reads first.

Enjoyed this article? Get the biggest legal industry updates, deals, appointments, insights and expert interviews in your inbox, free.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anuj Kumar
https://legaldesire.com/about-us/
Legal Desire Media and Insights is a leading legal news and insights platform founded in 2012 by Anuj Kumar, a lawyer, author and legal industry entrepreneur with 14 years in legal publishing. Our editorial team covers judgments, deals, law firm updates, careers and policy across India, the US, UK and Gulf. Coverage is editorially independent; sponsored posts are labeled Partner Content. Contact: legaldesire.com/contact