Back

Puran Singh v. State of Uttaranchal — Ballistic mismatch

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

The facts

The ballistic expert’s own opinion showed the cartridge recovered had not been fired from the gun allegedly used by the accused.

The Court held the accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt and that the High Court had not been justified in convicting on that record.

Why this belongs in the Forensic Docket: When the ballistic report itself contradicts the prosecution’s weapon theory, no amount of eyewitness testimony fixes that.

Case details

Citation [2008] 1 S.C.R. 491
Case number Criminal Appeal No. 437/2006
Court Indian Supreme Court
Decided 2008
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