LAXMAN AND OTHERS vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Supreme Court held that omissions in a witness's previous statements do not automatically amount to contradictions under Section 145 of the Evidence Act. The Court emphasized that such omissions can affect the probative value of the witness's testimony and should be considered in the context of the totality of evidence. The High Court's failure to account for these omissions led to a misassessment of the evidence, resulting in the acquittal of Sopan, the accused, on the grounds of benefit of doubt.