Back
C. R. DASH, PARTHA SARATHI SEN
Israfil Haque Sarkar @ Sk. – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.
1. The instant two appeals arise out of a common judgment of conviction dated 06.10.2007 and order of sentence dated 08.10.2007 as passed by the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 3rd Fast Track Court, Berhampore, Murshidabad, in Sessions Trial no. 18/April/2007 arising out of Sessions Serial no. 343/2007 whereby and whereunder the said court by the impugned judgment found both the accused persons namely; Rafiqul Sk. and Israfil Haque Sarkar @ Sk. guilty for committing offence under Sections 302/34 IPC and by the impugned order of sentence dated 08.10.2007, sentenced both the convicts to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- i.d. to suffer S.I. for one month each with a direction that the period of detention shall be set of under Section 428 Cr.P.C.
2. Convict Rafiqul Sk. felt aggrieved and thus preferred the Criminal Appeal no. 439 of 2008. Similarly Israfil Haque Sarkar @Sk. also felt aggrieved with the impugned judgment and order of sentence and thus preferred Criminal Appeal no. 02 of 2008.
3. Since both the aforementioned two appeals have arisen out of the self same judgment and order of sentence, we propose to dis
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 main legal point established is that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, all circumstances must be proven beyond reasonable doubt to establish guilt, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies can lead to acquittal.
The court ruled that both the 'last seen together' theory and extra-judicial confessions require corroboration and cannot independently sustain a conviction.
The court held that circumstantial evidence, including extra-judicial confession and motive, can be sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused, and that the distinction between culpable homicid....
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove all the circumstances which are required to be proved in order to complete the chain of circumstances towards the guilt of the a....
Provisions of Section 106 of Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and categoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within knowledge of a person, burden of proving that fact is upon him.
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
