Back
GOUTAM BHADURI, RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL
Indrajit Sahu, S/o Iswar Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Police Station Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT ON BOARD :
Radhakishan Agrawal, J.
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment dated 06.11.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, C.G. in Sessions Trial No.71/2018, by which the appellant herein has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC') and sentenced for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for two years.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.07.2018 at 10:30 pm, appellant went to the house of Manish Yadav (hereinafter called as 'deceased') and took him to his house. When the deceased did not return to his house till morning of 23.07.2018, then complainant-Dinesh Yadav, father of the deceased, went to the house of appellant at 6:00 am where he saw his son (deceased) lying dead on the floor in a pool of blood and the appellant was not present in the house. The incident was informed to PW-9 Yaman Yadav and one Hemant Dewangan and thereafter it was reported to the police station Chikli, Rajnandgaon where Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-1) was registered, on the basis of which FIR (Ex.
The burden of proving a plea specially set up by an accused lies upon the accused, and in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence to prove ....
The court upheld the conviction under IPC Section 302, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain, proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt without the accused providing an adeq....
The judgment establishes the principle that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The application of Section 106 of t....
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt in murder cases, especially when the accused fails to explain their presence at the crime scene.
Offence of Murder – Conviction set aside - A grave and heinous crime had been committed but when there is no satisfactory proof of guilt - Benefit of doubt to accused appellants.
The burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act places a duty on the accused to offer a plausible explanation for the circumstances of the crime, especially in cases of circumstantial evide....
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
