Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SUDHIR SINGH, RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Sunita Devi, W/o. Nathuni Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUDHIR SINGH, J.
The present criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of acquittal dated 07.10.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- III, Madhubani in Sessions Trial No. 633 of 2023, arising out of Benipatti P.S. Case No. 93 of 2023, whereby Respondent No. 2 has been acquitted from the charge of Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the accused persons, namely, Amit Kumar, Arun Kumar Safi, Sita Saran Yadav, Dukhi Yadav, Bhima @ Vijay Kumar Mahto used to run illegal liquor business in the village of the informant. One Pradeep Kumar who was the son of the informant used to object to the illegal business done by the accused persons. However, from several days before the alleged occurrence, Pradeep Kumar developed a friendship with the accused persons, irrespective of the warnings given by the informant. On 07.05.2023, around 10:00 PM, all the five accused persons named above came to the house of the informant on two motorcycles, and called her son to go to the Barati of the son of Kishan Ram. The son of the informant went to the Barati, and
The prosecution's failure to establish a conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence warranted the acquittal of the accused, as inconsistencies in witness testimonies created reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and acquittals are reviewed under strict guidelines favoring the presumption of innocence.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere circumstantial evidence and delayed FIR weaken the case, necessitating independent corroboration.
Appeals against acquittal warrant interference only if trial findings perverse or impossible; circumstantial case fails without complete chain excluding innocence, as here due to witness inconsistenc....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, especially when relying on circumstantial evidence, which requires stringent adherence to established evidentiary standards....
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is perverse or unsupported by evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The need for conclusive evidence and a complete chain of evidence to establish guilt, and the limited jurisdiction of the appellate court in interfering with findings of fact by the trial court.
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
