Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SOURENDRA PANDEY
Pramod Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as also perused the learned trial court records.
2. This appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 18.03.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 21.03.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned 21st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Motihari, East Champaran (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial court’) in Session Trial No.727 of 2019 arising out of Mehsi P.S. Case No.260 of 2019.
3. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’). By the order of sentence, he has been ordered to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
4. The prosecution case is based on the written information of one Pooja Devi (PW-4) who is the daughter-in-law of the deceased and sister-in-law of the appellant. In her written information, addressed to the
A conviction under Section 302 IPC can be upheld based solely on the testimony of the informant if corroborative evidence exists, even in absence of independent witnesses.
Eyewitness testimony must be consistent and corroborated; convictions cannot rely solely on the testimony of closely related witnesses without independent verification.
The conviction of the appellant was overturned due to insufficient evidence, with reliance on the testimony of an incompetent child witness and failure to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Eyewitness testimony holds credibility even when minor contradictions exist; motive for crime established through related witness accounts legitimizes conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The admissibility of partially hostile witness testimonies and the sufficiency of evidence to establish guilt were the central legal points established in the judgment.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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
