ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Haresh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL )
Heard the parties.
2. The present appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction dated 29.03.2023 and order of sentence dated 05.04.2023 passed by learned Additional District and Session Judge-I cum Special Judge SC/ST (P.O.A) Act, Buxar, in SC/ST case no. 173/2021, arising out of Brahmpur (Krishna Brahm) P.S. case no. 84/2003 whereby and where under the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 307, 452 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(i)(xi) of SC/ST (P.O.A) Act and has been sentenced to undergo seven years imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty five Thousand) under Section 307 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, appellant will have to suffer additional imprisonment for six months. Appellant has further been sentenced to undergo two years imprisonment under Section 324 I.P.C. and to undergo imprisonment for four years alongwith fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) under Section 452 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, appellant will have to suffer additional imprisonment of four months. Appellant has further been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for thr
Hurt, attempt to murder and house trespass – Dock identification has no meaning at all where Investigating Officer has not been examined and TIP is not available on record – Dock identification by fe....
The prosecution must establish the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt; weak witness identification leads to acquittal.
The court clarified that identification procedures must meet strict standards to ensure reliability; failure to do so results in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
Conviction for dacoity was overturned due to significant evidentiary inconsistencies, including lack of reliable identification and failure to examine critical witnesses.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for proper identification in court and the need for reliable and untampered evidence in criminal cases.
Failure of prosecution to prove charge beyond reasonable doubt due to inordinate delay in FIR and weak identification evidence.
The prosecution failed to establish the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies and procedural irregularities in identification parades.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.