SANJIV KHANNA, SANJAY KUMAR
Siba Nial @ Trilochan – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
ORDER
Leave granted.
2. This appeal by Siba Nial @ Trilochan challenges the judgment of affirmation by the High Court confirming his conviction under Sections 302 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [For short, “IPC.”], for the murder of Dhaneswar Kata and his wife, Nirupama Kata, during the intervening night of 31.05.2013 and 01.06.2013.
3. The case of the prosecution, as reflected in First Information Report [For short, “FIR.”] No. 72/2013 dated 01.06.2013 registered with Police Station – IIC, Boden, District - Nuapada, Odisha, is that Dhaneswar Kata and Nirupama Kata were found dead on the terrace of the house on the morning of 01.06.2013, having suffered gunshot injuries. They had gone to sleep on the previous night on the terrace of the house along with other family members, namely, Dhananjaya Kata, who was examined as PW-4, and Kishor Bachha, who was not examined.
4. Dhananjaya Kata (PW-4), in his Court deposition, did not claim having seen the person(s) who had shot dead Dhaneswar Kata and Nirupama Kata. This was also confirmed by the informant, Hrushikesh Kata (PW-1), who did not name any particular person as a culprit in the FIR (Exhibit 1). Dalimba Kata (PW-2), the wife of
Murder and abetment of suicide – Conviction and sentence cannot be sustained where post-mortem report and deposition as well as ballistic report are ambiguous and do not support prosecution’s version....
The prosecution must prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and lack of reliable witness testimony can lead to reversal of a conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that circumstantial evidence, including motive and recovery of the weapon, must conclusively prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt....
In cases of cross-complaints arising from the same incident, both cases should be tried together; insufficient evidence to ascertain guilt leads to acquittal on severe charges.
A conviction for murder can be established on the basis of a credible solitary eyewitness, while absence of direct involvement leads to acquittal of another accused.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in witness testimonies can lead to acquittal.
The prosecution failed to prove that the deceased sustained any firearm injuries, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court affirmed that eyewitness testimony, even from relatives, can be credible and sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in murder cases.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.