Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Vipul M.Pancholi, Ramesh Chand Malviya
Shambhu Sharma Son of Late Raghu Nandan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vipul M. Pancholi, J.
The present appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) against the judgment of conviction dated 24.07.2017 and the order of sentence dated 27.07.2017, rendered by learned Ad-hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-VI, Aurangabad in Sessions Trial No.247 of 2013/46 of 2017, arising out of Pauthu P.S. Case No.65 of 2010, whereby the Trial Court has convicted the appellant herein for the offences punishable under Sections 302 /34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE as well as under Section 27 of the ARMS ACT and he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offences punishable under Sections 302 /34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and in default of payment of fine, the appellant has to undergo S.I. for six months. The appellant is further sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the ARMS ACT and in default of payment of fine, the appellant has to undergo S.I. for six months. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
2. The factual matrix of the present case is as under:-
2.
The court holds that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to significant contradictions in eyewitness accounts and absence of supporting medical evidence, warranting acqu....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; uncorroborated and contradictory witness accounts render convictions unsafe.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; unreliable eyewitness testimony, especially from near relatives, cannot substantiate a conviction.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and lack of independent witnesses can lead to quashing of conviction.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt leads to acquittal.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on witness testimony requires corroboration, especially when witnesses are near relatives.
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
