Back
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Pramod Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Ashutosh Kumar, J. – Both the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. We have heard Mr. Gouranga Chatterjee, the learned Advocate for the appellants and Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, the learned APP for the State.
3. The appellants have been convicted under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years, to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer R.I. for One year under Section 302/34 of the IPC and R.I for five years, to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer R.I. for six months under Section 27 of the Arms vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.09.2015/ 10.09.2015 respectively, passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya in Sessions Trial No. 48/2014 /505/2012 arising out of Khijarsarai P.S. Case No. 67 of 2012. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
4. Both the appellants are alleged to have killed Murari Sharma, the brother of informant (PW8)
5. Appellant/Mamta Devi in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 1019 of 2015 is the wife of the deceased/Mu
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, relying primarily on credible eyewitness testimony and corroborative forensic evidence, particularly in murder convictions.
The court acquitted the appellants due to insufficient evidence and inconsistencies in witness testimonies, emphasizing the need for credible proof in criminal convictions.
(1) While appreciating evidence in criminal cases, there cannot be a strait-jacket formula. Evidence must be appreciated from perception of a prudent common man.(2) Conduct of a stranger eyewitness t....
The reliability of eyewitness accounts and dying declarations is crucial for a conviction under Section 302 of the IPC; discrepancies and doubts in witness testimonies can lead to acquittal.
The court reaffirmed that the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies warranted the benefit of doubt, leading to acquittal of the accuse....
The conviction of the appellant was overturned due to insufficient evidence, with reliance on the testimony of an incompetent child witness and failure to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The judgment underscores the necessity for the prosecution to provide clear, consistent, and credible evidence in criminal cases, particularly when familial enmity is involved, to meet the standard o....
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
