Back
M. M. SUNDRESH, RAJESH BINDAL
Ranvirsinh Kayamsinh Bhadoria – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. charges framed and initial convictions of appellants (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments related to evidence and doubts regarding convictions (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's consideration of reasonable doubt and evidence evaluation (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. final judgment and acquittal of appellants (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
ORDER
1. The appellants have been arraigned as accused No.1 and accused No.2. Charges had been framed against the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 364 , 302, 506 Part-II read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, 'the IPC') and Section 135(1) of the BOMBAY POLICE ACT , 1951 (for short, 'the Act, 1951'). The appellants were subsequently convicted only for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the evidence of PWs-2 and 4, which the High Court has relied upon while acquitting accused no.3 to 5, ought to have been followed for the appellants as well (accused No.1 and accused no.2). The witnesses to the inquest report have not been examined.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has also brought to the notice of this Court that
The court emphasized the necessity of reliable evidence for conviction, ruling that inconsistencies in witness testimonies warranted the benefit of the doubt for the appellant.
(1) Though, motive may pale into insignificance in a case involving eyewitnesses, it may not be so when an accused is implicated based upon circumstantial evidence.(2) Report of Ballistic Expert is a....
Appellate courts must exercise caution in reversing acquittals, respecting the plausible views of Trial Courts and maintaining the presumption of innocence.
The High Court's acquittal was upheld due to contradictions in witness testimonies and issues with the recovery evidence, emphasizing the importance of credible evidence in criminal proceedings.
(1) Court will have to be conscious of witness's credibility and other evidence produced when dealing with a recovery under Section 27 of Evidence Act.(2) To attract Section 149 of IPC, prosecution h....
A conviction under IPC requires reliable evidence and cannot solely rely on weapon recovery or forensic reports when eyewitnesses turn hostile.
Dying declarations must be corroborated by credible evidence; in absence of reliable proof, an acquittal is warranted due to the presumption of innocence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
