Back
SARANG V. KOTWAL
Shaukatali Abdulsalem Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The appellant has challenged the judgment and order dtd. 17/1/2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.37/2011. The appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 392 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer RI for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1, 000.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for three months. He was also convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 397 read with 34 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer RI for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1, 000.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for three months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. He was granted set off under Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C. for the period of detention undergone as under-trial prisoner.
2. Initially, there were two accused in the case. However, accused No.2 Mhammaad Mehtabli was absconding and, therefore, the trial was conducted only against the present appellant.
3. The prosecution case is that on 14/9/2009 after midnight i.e. between the intervening night of 13/9/2009 and 14/9/2009, the first informant was waiting to go home after reaching Thane. Two persons
The judgment emphasizes the importance of reliable evidence, doubts exaggerated testimony, and highlights the significance of recovery evidence and incriminating circumstances in establishing guilt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court emphasized the lack of conclusive evidence....
Point of law : whenever the charge is framed for higher offence, the Court retains the power to convict an accused for a lesser offence even in the absence of a charge being framed for lesser offence....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between robbery and theft under the Indian Penal Code, and the requirement for specific intent and actions to constitute robbery. T....
Proper identification of an accused requires reliable procedures, and cases with significant inconsistencies in evidence should raise reasonable doubts regarding conviction.
The absence of a Test Identification Parade, along with inadequacies in prosecution evidence, poses a reasonable doubt on the conviction under Section 395 IPC.
In criminal law, a conviction requires the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any doubts must benefit the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the modification of the convictions and sentences of the accused persons under the Indian Penal Code based on the court's findings regarding their ....
Identification of an accused at trial, despite lacking a Test Identification Parade, can support a conviction when corroborated with reliable recovery 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
