Back
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU
Abdul Kayum S/o Mohammad Aayub – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This criminal revision is filed against the judgment dated 29.3.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.30/2009 whereby learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh dismissed appeal of revisioner and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.12.1999 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Manendragarh in Criminal Case No.621/1997 convicting applicant under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and sentencing him to undergo RI for 03 years with fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo RI for 06 months.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 03.11.1997 at about 10:15 p.m. in night, the complainant was going to his house after closing his shop. When complainant reached near temple of Chanwari-daand, revisioner appeared and threw acid upon him. Complainant caught hold of revisioner by his hands for some time, however, revisioner managed to flee from there. Complainant was taken to the hospital and thereafter report of incident was lodged in concerned police station. Due to acid throwing, complainant suffered burn injuries on his chest, ear, cheek, left eye, lips, neck etc. Based on said complaint, offence under Section 3
The testimony of the victim of a crime does not require corroboration if it inspires confidence and can be the basis for conviction. The court's interference in concurrent findings of fact is limited....
The prosecution's reliance on credible testimony can uphold convictions despite hostile witnesses, while procedural irregularities are insufficient to undermine guilt if substantive evidence exists.
A conviction for an acid attack was overturned due to lack of credible evidence linking the accused, highlighting the necessity of substantial proof in sensitive cases involving caste dynamics.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere testimony of the victim is insufficient without corroboration.
Medical evidence must prove permanent privation of sight for Section 326 IPC conviction; otherwise, convict under Section 324 IPC.
An accused cannot be convicted solely based on identification without clear evidence, especially when all co-accused are acquitted, leading to a benefit of doubt.
Revisional jurisdiction allows setting aside perverse concurrent convictions where prosecution story is physically implausible, lacks corroboration, relies on inadmissible evidence, despite general b....
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
