Back
RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Devendra Yadav, S/o. Sri Nathuni Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J.)
Heard Mr. Amish Kumar, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Bipin Kumar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 10.12.2012 and order of sentence dated 12.12.2012, passed by the Court of learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-II, Sitamarhi, in Session Trial No. 60 of 2005, GR No. 250 of 2004, arising out of Sahiyara PS Case No. 58 of 2004, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years, to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further imprisonment for six months under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-(rupees two thousand) and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further imprisonment for one month under Section 27 of Arms Act. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution case in brief is tha
Inconsistencies in witness testimonies led to the acquittal of the appellant, as the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; eyewitness identification and medical corroboration affirmed the conviction under various sections of the IPC and Arms Act.
The requirement of corroborative eyewitness testimonies to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal convictions.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on unreliable witness testimony cannot sustain a conviction.
The consistent and trustworthy testimonies of eyewitnesses, supported by medical evidence, are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a murder case.
The court emphasized the necessity of reliable witness testimony and corroborative evidence in criminal cases, particularly where previous enmity exists, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; lack of key evidence undermines conviction.
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
