Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SARANG V.KOTWAL, S.M.MODAK
Shyam Damodar Inchal – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sarang V. Kotwal, J.
1. This Appeal is preferred by the original accused in Sessions Case No.448 of 2013 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai. Vide his Judgment and order dated 11.05.2017, the learned Judge convicted him. The case involved commission of murder of two victims Seema Inchal and Rajendra Rane. Seema was the appellant’s wife and Rajendra washis friend. At the conclusion of the trial, the Appellant was convicted for commission of the offence punishable U/s.302 of the I.P.C. under two separate heads for committing two murders. For each of these heads, he was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for six months. He was also convicted for commission of offence U/s.324 of the I.P.C. for causing injuries to one Mitesh and for that offence he was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to suffer S.I. for one month. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. He was given set off U/s.428 of the Cr.p.c.
2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the Appellant was suspecting that there was illicit relation between Mites
The court affirmed that premeditated murder requires intent and that corroborative evidence from an eyewitness, alongside forensic data, can prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Murder - Conviction upheld - Medical evidence also shows that deceased had suffered injuries on head as mentioned earlier - Cause of death was “head injury.” Looking at nature of injuries, it is quit....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court emphasized the importance of conclusive evidence and highlighted the lack of p....
In circumstantial evidence murder cases, prosecution must prove each link beyond reasonable doubt forming complete chain excluding other hypotheses; deficiencies in motive, last seen, confession, rec....
The strength of circumstantial evidence and the authority of the District Legal Services under Section 357a of Cr.P.C. were central to the judgment.
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 court determined that the Appellant's actions lacked intent to kill, leading to a conviction under Section 304 Part-II instead of Section 302.
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
