Back
VIBHA KANKANWADI, Y. G. KHOBRAGADE
Vishal Budhanand Thorat – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
1. Present appeal has been filed by the original accused in Sessions Case No.8/2015. He has been held guilty for committing murder of his wife.
While awarding sentence for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code the learned Sessions Judge, Latur on 28.01.2016 has sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months.
2. The prosecution story is that one Rahul Ramdas Tarkase, who was serving as Assistant Police Inspector with Ausa Police Station, Dist. Latur, had received phone call from one Shesherao Lanjare, r/o Umbadga (Bk) informing that a dead body of a lady is lying in the field of one Dipak Thorat of Umbadga (Bk) village and, therefore, API Mr. Tarkase with his team had gone to the spot. Inquest Panchnama as well as spot panchnama was prepared with the help of two panchas. At that point itself the land owner Dipak Thorat gave information to Police Station and, therefore, Accidental Death under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was registered vide A.D. No.46/2014. The postmortem was got done on 23.10.2014
The judgment emphasizes the high standard of proof required for convictions based on circumstantial evidence and the need for voluntary and credible extra-judicial confessions.
The burden of proof shifts to the accused to explain what happened to the deceased when the prosecution establishes that the deceased and the accused had left the house together and soon thereafter t....
In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, each link must be established beyond reasonable doubt, with all evidence consistently pointing to the guilt of the accused.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, all circumstances must be proven beyond reasonable doubt to establish guilt, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies can lead to acquittal.
The court held that mere suspicion is insufficient for a conviction; a complete chain of circumstantial evidence is required to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, with the prosecution required to establish every link 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
