Back
S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV, RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
Somaling @ Soma S/o Pandit Shendage – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR, J.
These two Criminal appeals are arising out of the same occurrence, call in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Vijayapura, dated 28.03.2017 in S.C.No.73/2015, wherein accused No.1 has preferred Criminal Appeal No.200113/2017 independently and accused No. 4 has preferred his own independent appeal in Criminal Appeal No.200133/2017 for finding them guilty of committing an offence under Section 302 R/w Section 149 of the IPC and sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.30,000/each for the said offence and in default to pay the fine amount, they were ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months.
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR)
2. That within the jurisdiction of Kannur village in Sy.No.298 measuring 5 acres of land was purchased by the uncle of accused No.1Kammanna, i.e., Rudrappa, from Malappa Barakade. The accused No.1 was insisting the said Malappa Barakade to get back the said landed property. For that, Malappa was not inclined to return the said land. Therefore, because of this insistence and pressure of accused No.1, Malappa Barakade informed dec
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, emphasizing the quality of evidence over quantity.
Conviction for murder upheld based on consistent witness testimony, and acquittal appeals require high scrutiny, with previous enmity not negating witness credibility.
The conviction for murder was upheld based on substantial eyewitness testimony and evidence of motive, affirming the principle that direct evidence substantiates a guilty verdict beyond reasonable do....
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 ....
Conviction for mass murder under 302/149 IPC set aside due to unreliable, contradictory ocular evidence from related witnesses; doubtful night identification, improbable presence/story; benefit of do....
Conviction for murder under Section 302 established through credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, despite minor inconsistencies and investigation delays.
The reliability of an injured eye-witness testimony and its corroboration by medical evidence are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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
