Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Ashutosh Kumar, Jitendra Kumar
Pankaj Kumar Pandey, Son of Late Harimohan Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties and representation in the appeals. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. convictions and sentences of the appellants. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. factual background of the victim's kidnapping. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. trial outcomes and witness examination. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. concerns about trial handling. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. reliability of testimonies and evidence. (Para 15 , 31 , 33) |
| 7. decision to acquit appellants. (Para 36) |
| 8. conclusions and orders of the court. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.
Both the appeals have been taken up together and are being disposed off by this common judgment.
2. Pankaj Kumar Pandey and Lal Babu Yadav are the appellants in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 202 of 2016, whereas Binod Das is the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 274 of 2016.
3. Mr. Jagnnath Singh and Ms. Renu Jha, the learned Advocates have appeared for appellant No. 1 & 2, namely, Pankaj Kumar Pandey and Lal Babu Yadav [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 202 of 2016] respectively, whereas appellant/Binod Das [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 274 of 2016] has been represented by Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, the learned Advocate.
4. The State, in both the appeals, has been represented by Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, the l
Convictions based on familial testimonies alone, without corroborating evidence, cannot uphold; insufficient evidence warrants acquittal.
Prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; witness inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to acquittal.
The court established that the testimony of eyewitnesses, especially those with a history of enmity towards the accused, must be scrutinized carefully, and that the prosecution bears the burden of pr....
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and procedural flaws in evidence can lead to acquittal.
The court modified the conviction from attempted murder to a lesser charge due to insufficient evidence of intent and lack of specific identification of the appellants as shooters.
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
