Back
K SURESH REDDY, K SREENIVASA REDDY
Parimi Venkata Naidu – Appellant
Versus
State of AP Rep PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.Sreenivasa Reddy, J.
On 06.11.2023, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Sri K.Sita Ram, learned counsel, submitted that the appeal was preferred by the father of the deceased against the acquittal judgment dated 17.10.2014 in S.C. No.136 of 2013 on the file of the VI Additional Sessions Court, Anantapur at Gooty and the learned counsel for appellant, Sri Maheshwar Rao Kuncheam, had given up the vakalat and therefore, notice has to be sent to the appellant. As name of the appellant was not printed in the cause list, the Registry was directed to send the notice through the concerned District Court to the appellant for his appearance. On 11.07.2024 and 25.07.2024, as the appellant did not choose to engage a counsel though notice was served on him, the matter was adjourned for two weeks on each occasion. On 08.08.2024 also, when the matter was taken up, the appellant did not engage any counsel to represent his case. Hence, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor was requested to go through the record and assist the Court.
2. This Criminal Appeal by the father of the deceased Parimi Jagadeesh Babu @ Babu, is directed against the judgment dated 17.10.2014 passed in Sessio
A conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of one witness unless that testimony is wholly reliable and corroborated by other evidence.
The judgment underscores the principle that a conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of a single witness unless it is wholly reliable and corroborated by other evidence.
The judgment underscores the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned without compelling evidence, emphasizing the importance of consistent and reliable witness testimonies in criminal ca....
The court established that a conviction for murder can be sustained on the basis of circumstantial evidence, provided that the evidence forms a complete chain that leads to the only reasonable conclu....
An appellate court should not lightly interfere with an order of acquittal, even if it believes that there is some evidence pointing to the guilt of the accused.
THE EVIDENCE OF EYEWITNESSES IS CREDIBLE AND INSPIRING CONFIDENCE. NON-SUPPORTING SUCH A VERSION BY INDEPENDENT WITNESSES WOULD BE NO GROUNDS, TO DISCARD THEIR TESTIMONY. THE PRESENCE OF PWS.1 AND 2 ....
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death of the deceased in order to secure a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Pa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reliable and consistent evidence in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt, especially in cases relying on circumstantial evidence.
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
