Back
RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
Veerbhadra – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Rajendra Badamikar, J. - This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused No.1 under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Special Case (SC/ST) No.382/2011 dated 23.09.2016.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred with the original rankings occupied by them before the Trial Court.
3. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are as under:
That the complainant has lodged a complaint as per Ex.P. 1 by setting the law in motion. It is alleged on 13.05.2011 he was deputed on picketing duty from 02-00 p.m. to 10-00 p.m. near Santosh Talkies, Kalaburagi. It is alleged that when he was discharging his duty, at 05-45 p.m., near Windsor Bar, accused No. 1 who was the husband of DYSP Smt. Madhuraveena came with 4 others and asked him to bring water battles from hotel, for which he asked politely to take the water bottle by himself. It is alleged that then accused No. 1 abused him in vulgar language asserting that he is the husband of DYSP and he would see that how the complainant would continue in the job and he would see that he would be removed from
The prosecution failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of independent corroboration.
Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; contradictions and a lack of independent witnesses led to the acquittal of the accused.
Convictions must rely on cogent, corroborative evidence; failure to provide such leads to acquittal.
The court confirmed the conviction under the SC/ST Act for caste-based assault, emphasizing the weight of corroborative evidence from the injured parties and proper explanation for the delay in filin....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on victim testimony, medical evidence, and witness statements to establish guilt, along with the consideration of the absence of delib....
The absence of corroborative evidence renders the sole testimony insufficient for conviction under criminal law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, and the court's duty to consider material contradictions in the e....
The court held that reliance on inconsistent and insufficient witness testimonies, alongside lack of medical evidence for grievous injuries, invalidates the conviction, necessitating acquittal.
The court reaffirms that police conduct during official duties must not infringe on rights, prioritizing eyewitness testimony in establishing guilt over medical evidence, thus validating convictions ....
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
