#Section 162 CrPC

Uttarakhand High Court acquits appellants in a POCSO and dacoity case, ruling that conviction cannot stand on uncorroborated in-court identification, recoveries made in police presence, and inconsistent medical evidence. The judgment underscores the necessity of reliable identification evidence under Section 162 CrPC for sustaining convictions in serious offences.

Madhya Pradesh High Court quashes FIR against accused solely implicated by inadmissible police statements under Section 27 and co-accused disclosures. Key precedent on Section 30 and 162 CrPC applied.