Back
RAMESH SINHA, RAVINDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL
Sachin Kesharwani @ Bholu, S/o. Mahendra Kesharwani – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Khadganwan, Korea (C. G. ) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, C.J.
Heard Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Shreyansh Agrawal, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State.
2. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.04.2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge F.T.S.C (POCSO), Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 54/2021, by which the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 376(a), 302 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month (separately), sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 05 years and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month (separately), sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of R
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt and the principle that the accused must provide a satisfactory explanation for incriminating evidence.
The court upheld the conviction based on established circumstantial evidence, affirming that all necessary conditions for such conviction were met.
Circumstantial evidence must form a conclusive chain linked to the accused, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt, with no viable alternative explanations for innocence.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a conclusive chain consistent with the accused's guilt; suspicion cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt in criminal convictions.
The court emphasized that circumstantial evidence must form a complete and unbroken chain to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Convictions based on circumstantial evidence must establish a reliable chain linking the accused to the crime 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
