Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Bibhash Mishra @ Bachchu Mishra, Son of Late Rajesh Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.)
We have heard Mr. S.K. Lal, learned counsel for the appellants in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 418 of 2019 and Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 519 of 2019, Mr. Rajan Ghosharve, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 607 of 2019 and Ms. Shashi Bala Verma as also Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, learned APPs for the State.
2. These three appeals have been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 15.03.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) in Sessions Trial Nos. 74 of 2018 and 440 of 2018 arising out of Matihani P.S. Case No. 163 of 2017 and the order of sentence dated 19.03.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Begusarai (in short ‘the learned trial court’).
3. By the impugned judgment of conviction, the appellants have been convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. By the impugned order, the appellants have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-each and in case of default of payment of fine, they have t
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Conviction based solely on testimonies of related witnesses is unsafe without independent corroboration, as evidenced by inconsistencies and lack of physical evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and contradictions and doubts in the evidence can lead to the f....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on credible eyewitness testimony, which was corroborated by medical evidence and surrounding circumstances, to prove the guilt of the ....
A single reliable eyewitness testimony can sustain a murder conviction, irrespective of contradictions in other testimonies.
The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on uncorroborated witness testimony, especially from related parties, is insufficient for conviction.
Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a clear chain of proof that excludes the possibility of innocence; mere suspicion is insufficient for legal conviction.
Key legal principles established include the standards of eyewitness reliability and the requirements for proving possession of intent in conspiracy cases, emphasizing that absence of evidence negate....
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
