Back
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, JITENDRA KUMAR
Ram Ekbal Raut @ Ram Ekbal Prasad @ Ekbal Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Jitendra Kumar, J.—The present appeal has been preferred by the informant impugning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, East Champaran at Motihari in Sessions Trial No. 573 of 2010 (CIS No. 2228 of 2016), arising out of Town P.S. Case No. 160 of 2007, whereby respondent No. 2 Mithu Raut, respondent No. 3 Chhotan Raut and Respondent No. 4 Pappu Raut have been convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and respondent No. 5 Lalan Raut has been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, but all the respondents/accused have been acquitted of charge under Sections 307 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 have been released under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act whereas respondent No. 5 has been released on bond under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.
2. The prosecution case as emerging from the Fardbeyan of the informant/appellant Ram Ekbal Raut as recorded by ASI Mundrika Prasad of Town P.S. Motihari, on 19.06.2007 at Sadar Hospital, Motihari, is that at about 9:30 P.M. on 18.6.2007, the informant was sitting in the corridor of his house along
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless there is clear error in the trial court's evaluation of evidence, respecting the presumption of innocence.
The acquittal was upheld due to the prosecution's failure to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for credible evidence.
The court affirmed convictions for offenses related to obscene acts and outraging modesty while granting probation based on the absence of prior offenses and reformative principles underlining the Pr....
The right to appeal for the victim under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code is prospective in nature and has been made enforceable w.e.f. 31.12.2009.
An acquittal by the trial court reinforces the presumption of innocence, and an appeal against such acquittal requires substantial justification, which was lacking in this 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
