Back
RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL
Sanno, W/o Late Banshilal Kalar – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station, Keshkal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Radhakishan Agrawal, J.
Heard.
1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.08.2011 passed in Criminal Appeal No.05/2011 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur, Place – Kondagaon, Bastar (C.G.), whereby judgment dated 07.05.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Keshkal (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.286/2009 the applicant has been convicted under Section 34(1)(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 and sentenced to undergo RI for three months and to pay fine amount of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional RI for one month. The learned Appellate Court while allowing the appeal in part confirmed the conviction of the applicant whereas reduced the jail sentence from three months RI to one month RI and directed to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional RI for one month.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.10.2007, Chander Lal Dhruw (PW-02), Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Station Keshkal along with other Police Officials went for patrolling to village Bahigaon and on the basis of information from the inf
The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, adhering to statutory requirements; failure to do so results in acquittal.
The conviction under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was set aside due to prosecution's failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt based on procedural violations.
The sufficiency of evidence, including the requirement for proper chemical analysis and the examination of independent witnesses, is crucial in determining the sustainability of a conviction in the e....
Conviction for illicit liquor possession cannot be based solely on non-chemical tests; lack of adequate evidence warrants acquittal.
The testimony of official witnesses can be the sole basis for conviction if it is reliable and consistent, even in the absence of independent witnesses.
The prosecution must prove the seizure and the nature of the seized material beyond all reasonable doubt, and the accused's statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not suffic....
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistent witness testimony undermines the credibility of charges under the Bihar Excise Act.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to produce key evidence undermines the conviction.
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
