Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, NANDESH S.DESHPANDE
State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Chandrapur – Appellant
Versus
Deoprasad @ Dewa, S/o. Bhujbal Deosare – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeals for enhancement and challenge of sentence. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background detailing events leading to crime. (Para 3) |
| 3. defendant argues based on circumstantial evidence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. defense addresses witness credibility. (Para 6 , 85) |
| 5. discussions on sentencing guidelines. (Para 10 , 120 , 124) |
| 6. prosecution presents evidence of last seen. (Para 11 , 14) |
| 7. medical examination evidence supporting homicide. (Para 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 8. final order on sentencing and victim compensation. (Para 135) |
JUDGMENT :
URMILA JOSHI PHALKE , J.
1. These Appeals are preferred by the State for enhancement of sentence, whereas by the accused challenging the order of sentence and conviction passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No. 16/2017 dated 30.11.2018, by which the accused is convicted as under:
1(i). The accused is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 3 64-A read with Section 3 4 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short “IPC”) and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 3 years.
1(ii). The accused is further convicted of the offence punishable
The judgment establishes that circumstantial evidence must form a complete, unbroken chain directly linking the accused to the crime, which warranted a life sentence in this case.
(1) Sentence – Power to impose punishment of imprisonment for life without remission is conferred only on Constitutional Courts and not on Sessions Courts.(2) Remission – No right accrues to accused ....
Circumstantial evidence, including recovery of crucial items, must be coherent and consistently point to guilt to meet the burden of proof required for conviction in murder cases.
In circumstantial murder cases, last seen theory alone cannot sustain conviction without complete evidentiary chain excluding innocence, especially with wide time gap allowing third-party interventio....
(1) Section 34 IPC and 115 IPC would not go hand in hand.(2) Evidence is raw material which Judge or Adjudicator uses to reach a finding of fact – Courts can record order of conviction even in a case....
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
