Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
PRASENJIT BISWAS
Harka Bahadur Karki – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
Judgment :
Prasenjit Biswas, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Darjeeling, in connection with Sessions Case No. 17/89.
2. By passing the impugned judgment this appellant found guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years.
3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said impugned judgment and order of conviction, the present appeal is preferred at the instance of the appellant.
4. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that:
“A complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant stating, inter alia, that on 6th January, 1984 he along with his companions were returning to a Marebong Tea Estate after having their marking at Janbari and as soon as they reached near Changtong Tea Estate they were chased by the group of assailants. The said assailants were throwing stones aiming on them and being so chased a few of this group turned towards the nearby village and the rest started running towards falls area. It is said in the said complaint that the group of assailants consisting of this appellant a
A conviction cannot be upheld if the prosecution fails to establish the identity of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, compounded by unreliable testimonies and contradictory medical evidence.
Point of Law : Any outsider or stranger committing a crime of murder, in which event, identification of assailant becomes very critical and crucial but in light of evidences as brought on record, ide....
Conviction based on witness testimonies from interested parties without independent corroboration is unsustainable due to inherent unreliability.
Failure on the part of the prosecution to explain or disclose the genesis of the offence is also an additional factor which renders the prosecution story a bit doubtful.
The testimony of injured witnesses is accorded greater evidentiary value, and the prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, even if minor contradictions exist.
The main legal point established is that a conviction can be based on the evidence of a sole eyewitness if it is unimpeachable and inherently believable, and the burden of proof for establishing a pl....
Conviction under Sections 302 and 326 of IPC requires credible ocular evidence, with emphasis on eyewitness credibility, especially from injured parties, establishing guilt despite differing roles am....
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in witness testimonies and non-examination of the Investigator can lead to acquittal.
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
