Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Ram Snehi Singh @ Ram Snehi Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Shailendra Singh, J.—The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 28.04.2023 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge -VII, Vaishali at Hajipur in Sessions Trial Case No. 437 of 2002 arising out of Bidupur P.S. Case No. 274 of 2001 whereby the learned trial court has acquitted the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 of the offences for which they were charged.
2. The substance of the prosecution story is as follows:—
As per the informant, namely Ram Snehi Singh @ Ram Snehi Kumar, on 18.10.2001, he was at his house then his brother Padam Ranjan Singh (respondent No. 2) and his cousin brother Om Prakash Singh (respondent No. 3) equipped with farsa and lathi came there and started abusing him and when he objected, the respondents got infuriated upon his resistance and thereafter he was assaulted by farsa on his head by respondent No. 2 and in following with the direction given by the respondent No. 2, respondent No. 3 also started assaulting him by means of lathi. When he cried, his wife, his uncle Vishambhar Singh, Lalan Singh, co-villager Satendra Kumar Singh and some other persons arrived there and saved him and thereafter, he was taken to the Sadar hospital, Ha
The prosecution's failure to explain injuries to the accused and the unexplained delay in FIR registration raised doubts that led to the allowance of the appeal.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and lack of independent witnesses can lead to quashing of conviction.
A conviction under Section 394 IPC requires evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which is compromised by significant procedural lapses and inconsistencies in witness statements.
The court emphasized the prosecution's burden to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting inconsistencies and the absence of independent corroboration in witness testimonies.
Conviction cannot stand when significant doubts arise due to contradictory testimonies and acquittal of co-accused on similar evidence, emphasizing the principle of parity in criminal proceedings.
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
