RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Vikash Kumar, S/o. Krishna Tivari @ Krishna Mistri – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.)
Heard Mr. Binay Kumar, learned advocate for the appellant, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1, learned Special PP for the State and Mr. Irshad, learned Amicus Curiae.
2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 16.05.2018 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order dated 17.05.2018 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Spl. Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari (in short ‘trial court’) by which the sole appellant in this case has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and has been ordered to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/. In case of default in payment of fine, he has been ordered to further undergo imprisonment for six months.
Prosecution Story
3. The prosecution story is based on the written report dated 12.05.2014 written by one Naresh Raut (P.W.-4). The informant alleged that on 12.05.2014 at about 12:00 noon, the named accused persons (1) Ajay Kumar Sah and (2) Vikas Kumar both resident of village Hasanpura, P.S. Sugauli, Dis
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the last seen theory and the accused's failure to explain the circumstances of the death.
Murder and disappearance of evidence – Whenever any doubt emanates in mind of Court, benefit shall accrue to accused and not prosecution – Conviction only on the basis of last seen together cannot be....
(1) Apex Court in a criminal appeal by special leave will ordinarily loath to enter into a fresh re-appraisement of evidence and question credibility of witnesses when there is a concurrent finding o....
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence and the last seen theory in establishing the guilt of the accused.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, especially when relying on circumstantial evidence, which requires stringent adherence to established evidentiary standards....
Circumstantial evidence can sustain a murder conviction when it establishes a complete chain of events that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
The prosecution must prove homicidal death beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial evidence alone, including last seen theory, is insufficient for conviction.
Conviction for murder can be sustained based on circumstantial evidence and the last seen theory, particularly when the accused fails to explain crucial circumstances.
The sufficiency and reliability of circumstantial evidence, including the last seen theory, motive, abscondence, and recovery of evidence, in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The absence of corroborative evidence from reliable witnesses and the failure of the prosecution to establish a motive led to the overturning of the conviction based on circumstantial evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.