Back
A. M. BADAR, SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR
Birendra Yadav S/o. Natho Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.M. Badar, J.
By this appeal, the appellant/convicted accused is challenging the Judgment and Order dated 29.11.2013 and 30.11.2013 respectively passed in Sessions Trial No.320 of 2012 by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-V, Purnea, thereby convicting him of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life apart from directing him to pay fine of Rs.10000/-and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.
2. Facts leading to the prosecution of the appellant/convicted accused can be summarized thus :
(a). Appellant Birendra Yadav is resident of village-Jhouwari within jurisdiction of Police Station-Banmankhi in Purnea District of Bihar. P.W.11 Sunaiyna Devi is also the resident of the same village and her house was located just in front of house of appellant Birendra Yadav. Maharani Devi (since deceased) was daughter of P.W.11 Sunaiyna Devi. As the appellant and Maharani Devi (since deceased) were having their respective houses just opposite to each other, love relations between them developed and ultimately in the year 2006, Maharani Devi married appellant Birendra Yadav.
(b). According
The burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act and the use of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt were central legal principles in the judgment.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the importance of reliable and consistent evidence.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on eyewitness testimony and established motive, dismissing intoxication as a defense.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on credible witness testimonies and corroborating evidence to prove the guilt of the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Cod....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence led to the appellant's acquittal.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence, establishing the accused's guilt through a combination of testimonies, confessional statements, and lack of viable alterna....
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
