Back
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Joni Pasi @ Ravindra Pasi, Son of Late Bhagalu Pasi @ late Bhagelu Pasi – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Vipul M. Pancholi, J.)
Both these appeals have been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) challenging the judgment of conviction dated 27.03.2017 and the order of sentence dated 29.03.2017, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Buxar, in Sessions Trial No. 256 of 2016, arising out of Nawanagar P.S. Case No. 41 of 2016, whereby and whereunder all the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34, 448/34 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short) and have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC. The appellants have been further sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 448/34 of the IPC and also to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 323/34 of the IPC. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
2. The facts of the present case, in a nutshell, are as under:-
2.1. The prosecution case is based on the fard-beyan of the informant Kanchan Pasi, recorded by Sub Inspector of Police of Nawanagar Police Station, Bux
The conviction upheld based on credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, despite the absence of independent witnesses, affirming the trial court's judgment.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and lack of independent witnesses can lead to quashing of conviction.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on witness testimony requires corroboration, especially when witnesses are near relatives.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on related witnesses without corroboration is insufficient for conviction.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt leads to acquittal.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; unreliable eyewitness testimony, especially from near relatives, cannot substantiate a 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
