Top Highlights

• Any concession or admission of a fact by a defence counsel would definitely be binding on his client, except the concession on the point of law. As a legal proposition we cannot agree with the submission canvassed on behalf of the appellants that an answer by a witness to a suggestion made by the defence counsel in the cross examination does not de...
• suggestion made by the defence counsel to a witness in the cross-examination, if found to be incriminating, would definitely bind the accused.
• accused can’t get away stating that his counsel had no implied authority to make suggestions in the nature of admissions against his client
• The initial burden to establish the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt rests on the prosecution. The prosecution, the Court said, has to prove its case on its own legs and cannot derive advantage or benefit from the weakness of the defence. However, the Bench made an important clarification
• “We are not suggesting for a moment that if prosecution is unable to prove its case on its own legs then the Court can still convict an accused on the strength of the evidence in the form of reply to the suggestions made by the defence counsel to a witness

Domain