K SURESH REDDY, K SREENIVASA REDDY
Vemula Kiran Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of AP, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. Suresh Reddy, J.
Both the accused in Sessions Case No.398 of 2015 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur, are the appellants in the present Criminal Appeal.
2. The appellants/accused were tried and convicted by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur, for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for LIFE and also to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each.
3. The substance of the charge is that, on 10.02.2011, at about 11.30 AM, both the accused caused the death of the deceased namely Vemula Glori Jayanthi by pressing her face with a pillow, thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
4. Case of the prosecution, as per the evidence of prosecution witnesses, is as follows.
The necessity of strong and corroborative evidence in murder cases, particularly when relying on circumstantial evidence, was emphasized, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court established that a single blow without intent to kill does not meet the threshold for murder under Section 302 IPC, allowing for a conviction under Section 304 IPC instead.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and destruction of evidence, emphasizing the accused's failure to provide a reasonable explanation for the death of his wife.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and unreliable witness testimony cannot sustain a conviction.
The judgment establishes that child witness testimony, if credible and corroborated, can be sufficient for conviction, alongside the admissibility of extra-judicial confessions.
The court established that credible child witness testimony, when corroborated, can support a conviction, alongside the admissibility of extra judicial confessions.
Inconsistent dying declarations cannot support a conviction for murder under IPC Section 302.
The court established that actions leading to death can be classified as culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on the circumstances and intent.
The court reinforced the principle that when a death occurs in a domestic setting, the burden of explanation lies on the accused, particularly under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.
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.