Back
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, JITENDRA KUMAR
Hare Ram Yadav, Son of Late Suresh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ashutosh Kumar, J.
Heard Mr. Nachiketa Jha, learned Advocate for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The sole appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC vide Judgment dated 30.01.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. X, Saran in Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2016, G.R. Case No. 6322 of 2015, arising out of Manjhi P.S. Case No. 221 of 2015. By order dated 31.01.2019, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. No default clause has been provided in the sentence.
3. One Hewanti Devi is alleged to have been stabbed to death by the appellant. The appellant is the relative of the deceased. The FIR has been lodged by the husband of the deceased, viz., Ranglal Yadav (P.W. 5). In his written report which has been scribed by one Anil Yadav (not examined), P.W. 5 has alleged that at about 10.00 A.M. on 09.11.2015 the appellant, on being annoyed with the pile of bricks in front of his house having been removed, started fighting with the deceased. He then stabbed her and ran away. The victim (deceased) was taken to a private doctor at Mohammadpur, from where the patient was referr
Familial relationships do not inherently discredit witness testimony; credible evidence can uphold a conviction despite investigative shortcomings.
The principle of benefit of doubt necessitates acquittal when the prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, especially with inconsistent eyewitness testimony.
The principle that the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that inconsistencies in witness testimony can lead to reasonable doubt, resulting in acquittal.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and procedural flaws in evidence can lead to acquittal.
As the medical evidence does not support the manner of assault on the victim. It also lends support to the defence case, such a wound could not be possible looking to the position of the victim & per....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and eyewitness testimony can suffice even without recovery of the murder weapon.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence, establishing the accused's guilt through a combination of testimonies, confessional statements, and lack of viable alterna....
The importance of prompt lodging of FIR, credibility of witnesses, and the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused were central legal principles established in the judgment.
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
