Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Rabiya Begam @ Rabiya Khatoon, wife of Anish – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.)
All the appeals have been taken up together and are being disposed off by this common judgment.
2. Heard Mr. Rama Kant Sharma, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, the learned Advocate, for all the appellants in the afore captioned appeals and Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma & Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, the learned Additional Public Prosecutors for the State.
3. The appellants, viz., Rabiya Begam @ Rabiya Khatoon [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 461 of 2014]; Raj Kishore Thakur [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 272 of 2014]; Jagdish Singh, Om Prakash Jat, Lakhpat Jat @ Lakh Pat, Dara Singh, Laxmi Devi, Rekha Devi and Shyamlal Jat @ Shyam Lal [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 276 of 2014] and Rajendra Thakur [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 640 of 2023] have been convicted for the offences under Sections 395 and 412 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short the IPC) vide judgment dated 11.02.2014 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Madhubani in Sessions Trial No. 356 of 2011, arising out of Arer P.S. Case No. 153 of 2010 (G.R. No. 2898 of 2010). By order dated 13.02.2014, they have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years, to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and in default of paymen
The absence of credible evidence and procedural irregularities create reasonable doubt, leading to an acquittal of the accused in criminal proceedings.
The judgment emphasized the importance of proving the possession of stolen property by the accused and the need to examine the investigating officer to establish the occurrence and recovery of looted....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that for conviction under Section 395 IPC, the involvement of five or more persons is necessary, as per the definition of dacoity in Section 391....
The court upheld the conviction of three accused under Section 412 IPC based on recovered stolen items, while acquitting others due to insufficient evidence and lack of identification.
For a conviction under IPC Section 395, participation of five or more persons is essential, and identification procedures must meet legal standards; failure leads to acquittal.
Conviction upheld for bank robbery based on credible witness testimonies; sentence modified to imprisonment already served.
The court reaffirmed the sufficiency of consistent eyewitness testimonies and proper identification in T.I. Parades to uphold a conviction for robbery under Section 395 of the IPC.
The judgment establishes the importance of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of weapons, and the conduct of the accused in determining guilt in a dacoity case.
A conviction under Section 395 of the IPC requires proof of the participation of five or more persons in the commission of dacoity; without such evidence, the conviction cannot stand.
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
