Back
B. VEERAPPA, S. RACHAIAH
Satish – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT/ORDER
S.RACHAIAH, J. - This appeal is filed by the appellants/accused against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed on 16/11/2017 by the Principal City Civil and Session Judge at Bengaluru in S.C.No.585/2011 whereby the Trial court sentenced the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC with a fine of Rs.10, 000.00 each, in default of payment of fine, the appellants shall further undergo imprisonment for six months. Further the trial Court sentenced the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.10, 000.00 each for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC r/w Sec. 34 in default of fine. They shall undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Further the trial Court directed the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs.10, 000.00 each for the offence punishable under Sec. 333 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC, in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:- The complainant was working as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police in Railway Police Station,
The court upheld the conviction for attempted murder but granted probation instead of imprisonment, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment due to the appellant's age and reformation.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and contradictions in the evidence can raise doubts about the case.
The court emphasized the necessity of corroborating witness testimonies with medical evidence and recognized the spontaneous nature of the incident in determining culpability.
(1) Minor discrepancies should not be given undue importance that don’t go to root of matter. Such contradictions are not material contradictions and evidence of such witnesses cannot be brushed asid....
When plea of alibi is raised, it is bounden duty of accused to prove the same in a convincing manner and on failure to do so, plea of alibi shall be negatived.
The court affirmed the conviction for attempt to murder but granted probation instead of imprisonment due to the appellant's age and subsequent conduct, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.
Eyewitness testimony, even from an interested witness, can sustain a conviction if corroborated by credible evidence and circumstances.
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
