SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(SC)-2002-11-27
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on November 18,2002

SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

REKHA SONI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-2-223] [REFERRED TO]
VIKAS SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-3-315] [REFERRED TO]
R. PRAKASH VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-319] [REFERRED TO]
ANTONY RAJ VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-377] [REFERRED TO]
PARTHASARATHI VS. STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2018-8-469] [REFERRED TO]
VENKATESAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-8-214] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESWARI ERANIYAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-150] [REFERRED TO]
ROOBAN PAUL VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-860] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMED ALEEM PASHA VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2020-12-114] [REFERRED TO]
DIGVIJAY KUMAR THAKUR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2020-6-40] [REFERRED TO]
BRIJESH SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2018-1-198] [REFERRED TO]
PAVAN KUMAR PANDEY VS. SANJAY TIGER RESERVE SIDHI [LAWS(MPH)-2020-8-190] [REFERRED TO]
MANJIT SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-9-311] [REFERRED TO]
ABHAY SHRENIKBHAI GANDHI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2015-12-180] [REFERRED]
SONIYA VS. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2022-3-107] [REFERRED TO]
M.YOGARAJ VS. STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-2-188] [REFERRED TO]
K. AMBIGAPATHY VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-8-357] [REFERRED TO]
K.CHANDRASEKAR VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-303] [REFERRED TO]
S.MURUGANANDHAM VS. INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-418] [REFERRED TO]
NAND BIHARI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-2-212] [REFERRED TO]
M/S MGS SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL VS. DISTRICT APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-2017-10-2] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-322] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHDEV SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(PAT)-2017-9-163] [REFERRED TO]
MOHANRAJ VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-428] [REFERRED TO]
M. FAZIUR RAHMAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-529] [REFERRED TO]
NILU MEENA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-2-100] [REFERRED TO]
GAJRAJ VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-1-494] [REFERRED TO]
R. KALAISELVI VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-1061] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYAKANTH VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-421] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH YADAV VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-1-203] [REFERRED TO]
NARASIMHASWAMY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-8-70] [REFERRED TO]
S. ARUMUGAM VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-539] [REFERRED TO]
R. ELANGOVAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-1057] [REFERRED TO]
JESTINRAJ VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-1065] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ASSAM VS. LALHRUAIZELA [LAWS(GAU)-2022-9-130] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK SINGH VS. STATE OF MP [LAWS(MPH)-2018-1-275] [REFERRED TO]
BHOOPENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2019-2-52] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2018-8-256] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM LOHIA AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2015-10-41] [REFERRED TO]
FAKRU VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-1-259] [REFERRED TO]
JAI KISHAN KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2020-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
VENKATCHALAM VS. STATE BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-2-176] [REFERRED TO]
K. KALAIVANI VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-1067] [REFERRED TO]
IN THE MATTER OF: SHRI MANISH MALHOTRA VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2018-8-245] [REFERRED TO]
SUBHAJIT SARKAR VS. THE GENERAL MANAGER, EASTERN RAILWAY [LAWS(CAL)-2014-2-125] [REFERRED TO]
NILU SINGH VS. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2016-4-53] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVEEN KUMAR BHAGAT AND ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2018-1-234] [REFERRED TO]
MD. SADDAM VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
ASHA SHARLET WARTHIKA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2023-3-492] [REFERRED TO]
MALATHY VS. STATE OF TAMIL NDU [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-12] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASAKARAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-147] [REFERRED TO]
MANIKANDAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-778] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-10-234] [REFERRED TO]
W ALDRIN VS. KANNAN [LAWS(MAD)-2020-12-479] [REFERRED TO]
HUSSAIN MOHAMMAD VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-1-190] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY @ AJITHKUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
K. BASHA VS. STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CIVIL SUPPLIES C.I.D. [LAWS(MAD)-2012-1-335] [REFERRED TO]
ANTONYRAJ VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-84] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDARAJ VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-404] [REFERRED TO]
VENKATESAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-434] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.)In our view, no further directions are required to be given in these matters. However, it is made clear that in case where accused disputes that he is not involved in the alleged incident and no article was found from him then such endorsement be taken on the photograph. Further with regard to the vehicle also, it is made clear that there may not be any necessity of producing the vehicle before the Court and the Seizure Report may be sufficient. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed of, accordingly.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.