Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH
ANIL L.PANSARE, Y.G.KHOBRAGADE
Parshuram Shankar Uike – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Per : ANIL L. PANSARE, J.)
The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati in Sessions Trial No. 273/2018 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC) and is sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000/-.
2. The appellant carries a blame of committing murder of his wife. The prosecution’s case is, however, based on circumstantial evidence.
3. The investigation was set in motion upon information given by one Vivek Subhashrao Raut. According to him, he has agricultural land situated at Village Pardi. He is, as such, resident of Morshi. Fifteen days back, appellant came to him along with his wife, namely, Gajri Uike and asked for work in his agricultural land. The informant employed appellant and his wife and also permitted them to reside in the hut situated in the agricultural land. The couple had a daughter, aged about two and half years.
4. On 21-8-2018, the informant had been to market at Morshi and he met appellant and his wife at around 2.00 p.m. Informant gave appellant Rs. 500/- for marketing. On 22-8-2018, at about
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt in homicide cases even without proof of motive, provided a complete chain of evidence is presented.
The court upheld the conviction under IPC Section 302, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain, proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt without the accused providing an adeq....
The judgment establishes the principles of circumstantial evidence, burden of proof, and the need for the accused to explain incriminating circumstances to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
(1) Murder – If in a case based on circumstantial evidence, accused evades response to an incriminating question or offers a response which is not true, such a response, in itself, would become an ad....
(1) Fact that a defence may not have been taken by accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. again cannot absolve prosecution from proving its case beyond all reasonable doubt.(2) Motive – In a case based on....
The court emphasized that circumstantial evidence must form a complete and unbroken chain to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence, including motive, in cases based on circumstantial evidence, and the evidence must be cogent, trustworthy, and exclude every possible hypo....
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : R. P. Gupta For the Respondent : C. P. Singh
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
