Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Kuldeep Rai @ Kuldeep Singh, S/o Sri Ram Lagan Rai – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.)
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Also, perused the trial court’s records.
2. This appeal against acquittal has been preferred by the informant who is father of the deceased (PW-5) for setting aside the judgment dated 18.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Vaishali at Hajipur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial court’) in Sessions Trial No. 205 of 2013 arising out of Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 30 of 2009 dated 02.03.2009 registered under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’).
Brief Facts of the Case
3. It appears from the trial court’s records that the FIR was registered by virtue of a direction issued by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali in exercise of his power under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’) in Complaint Case No. 3685/08. The Complaint Case was filed by the informant (PW-5). In the complaint petition, it is alleged as under:-
The informant’s daughter was married to this appellant in the year 2000 and after few days of marriage, the appellant and his family members started demandin
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere allegations without corroborative evidence are insufficient for conviction.
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused, finding no evidence of dowry harassment or foul play, concluding the death was accidental.
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, all circumstances must conclusively establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; any gaps can benefit the accused.
The prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty in connection with dowry shortly before her death, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
The court upheld that the prosecution failed to establish key elements of dowry harassment and death within seven years, maintaining the presumption of innocence for the accused.
Point of Law : The scope of Section 378 of Cr.P.C., in dealing with an appeal against the order of acquittal is to be borne in mind.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and in this case, the evidence did not establish the guilt of the accused ....
To convict under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of active instigation or facilitation of the suicide by the accused, which was not established in this case.
Inadmissible evidence cannot be used to draw inferences and hold the accused guilty of the alleged offense.
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
