Back
K SURESH REDDY, K SREENIVASA REDDY
Palavala Ramakrishna @ Chinnayya – Appellant
Versus
State Of AP Rep PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.Sreenivasa Reddy, J.
This Criminal Appeal by the appellant-sole accused is directed against the judgment, dated 14.12.2016, in Sessions Case No.112 of 2014 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, whereby the appellant was found guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and accordingly he was convicted of the said offences and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The substance of the charges framed against the appellant/sole accused is that on 31.12.2012 at about 4.00 PM, the accused took Balaga Appalaraju (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the deceased’) to Madduvalasa project, Vangara on the plea of bathin
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration to be reliable.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration to be credible.
Extrajudicial confessions are weak evidence and require corroboration; reliance on them must be cautious and supported by credible evidence.
Extrajudicial confessions require corroboration and cannot solely establish guilt without reliable evidence.
Extrajudicial confession can support a conviction if credible, corroborated by other evidence, and satisfies standards for circumstantial evidence.
In circumstantial evidence cases, each link in the evidence chain must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, supported by all proving consistent guilt without alternative explanations.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the gui....
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
