Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Avinash Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.—These two appeals have been preferred by the informant and the State respectively for setting aside the judgment dated 07.12.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) passed in Sessions Trial No. 838 of 2021 arising out of Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 243 of 2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Civil Court, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial court) by which the learned trial court has been pleased to acquit the respondent no. 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 384, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
2. Both the appeals were taken up for consideration after receipt of the trial court records. At the outset, it was decided to hear the appeals on their own merit for final disposal. Both the appeals were heard on 10.09.2024 and 11.09.2024 at length.
Prosecution Case
3. The prosecution story is based on the fardbeyan (Exhibit ‘1’) of Avinash Kumar (PW-1), resident of village Kachuara, P.S. Gopalpur, District-Patna recorded by S.I. S.N. Singh of Ram Krishnanagar Police Station on 19.07.2021 at 13:00 hours at Ford Hospital, Bed No. 408, Patna. In his
The presumption of innocence is paramount in criminal trials; an acquittal should only be overturned if the prosecution proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which was not demonstrated in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the testimony of witnesses, even if related to the deceased, should not be automatically discarded, and minor discrepancies in the evidence sh....
Appellate courts interfere with acquittal only if perverse or no reasonable view possible; non-explanation of accused injuries, witness contradictions, inconsistent prosecution version justify uphold....
The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt due to unreliable witness testimonies and procedural errors, resulting in the acquittal of the appellants.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in witness testimonies and non-examination of the Investigator can lead to acquittal.
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.
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
