Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Shailendra Singh
Ram Awadh Yadav, Son of Murahu Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. charges of murder and conspiracy established. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. evidence from prosecution witnesses. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. defense arguments against prosecution case. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. state's rebuttal to defense arguments. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. court's view on evidence reliability. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. court acquits appellants, benefit of doubt. (Para 40) |
| 7. final orders regarding bail and release. (Para 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.
These four criminal appeals are arising out of the judgment and order of sentence dated 02.04.2014 and 03.04.2014 respectively passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge- III, Kaimur at Bhabua (hereinafter referred to as the “learned trial court”) in Sessions Trial No. 126/305 of 2013(State vs. Surendra Yadav and Others). By the impugned judgment and order, the learned trial court has been pleased to hold the appellants guilty for the offences under Sections 147 , 148, 302 read with Section 149 and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short “IPC”) and Section 27 of the ARMS ACT and they have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each under Section 302 read with Section
Conviction based solely on testimonies of related witnesses is unsafe without independent corroboration, as evidenced by inconsistencies and lack of physical evidence.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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 ....
Point of law: Every person who witnesses a murder reacts in his own way. Some are stunned, become speechless and stand rooted to the spot. Some become hysteric and start wailing. Some start shouting ....
Discrepancies in eyewitness accounts undermined the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to reasonable doubt of their involvement in the crime.
The prosecution bears the burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and significant inconsistencies in witness testimony can lead to the acquittal of the accused.
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
