Roshan vs. The Attorney General – sllr 2011 volume 1 page 364

In Roshan v. The Attorney General, the court addressed the issue of whether procedural irregularities in the identification parade, misapplication of evidentiary rules regarding dock statements, improper allowance of bad character evidence, and the application of Section 383 of the Penal Code could justify upholding a conviction. It was held that cumulative prejudicial errors in the conduct of the identification parade, the mishandling of evidentiary issues, and misdirection by the trial judge rendered the convictions unsafe. The principle was reaffirmed that procedural fairness and strict compliance with evidentiary requirements are critical for upholding criminal convictions. The decision relied on principles from common law and relevant precedents, emphasizing that a conviction based on