Back
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Shankar Sahni – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Shailendra Singh, J. – Heard Mr. Jai Shankar Pathak, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Swastika, Advocate appearing for the sole appellant and Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, learned APP appearing for the State.
2. The present appeal has been preferred by the sole appellant, namely, Shankar Sahni with a prayer to set aside the judgment dated 18.08.2012 and order of sentence dated 24.08.2012 passed by the court of learned 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Patna City, in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 108 of 2008 arising out of Didarganj P.S. Case No. 48 of 2007, G.R. No. 696 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offences under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (herein-after referred to as the “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under section 302 of the IPC, with fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default of payment of the same, the appellant has been directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. The appellant has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under section 201 of the IPC with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of the same, he has been directed
It is a settled legal proposition that conviction of a person accused of committing an offence, is generally based solely on evidence that is either oral or documentary, but in exceptional circumstan....
The court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC, emphasizing that the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident fell within Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, each link must be established beyond reasonable doubt, with all evidence consistently pointing to the guilt of the accused.
Circumstantial evidence – Principle applicable to circumstantial evidence requires that facts must be consistent with hypothesis of guilt of accused.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain, excluding all reasonable hypotheses of innocence, for conviction; reliance on weak evidence leads to acquittal.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and mere circumstantial evidence or suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
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
