Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Buddha Prakash Soni (Died) Through Legal Heirs – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
1. This criminal appeal under Section 454 of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 21.07.2005 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh in Criminal Case No. 63 of 2005, whereby the application filed by the appellant/complainant under Section 452 of CrPC arising out of the judgment dated 14.06.2005 passed in Sessions Case No. 141/2004 has been rejected in which all the accused have been acquitted of the charges by the trial Court. During pendency of the appeal, complainant Buddha Prakash Soni expired, therefore, his legal representatives are substituted in his place as appellants.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that, a Criminal Case No. 141 of 2004 was initiated against the accused/respondents for commission of offence under Sections 395 and 412 of IPC on the complaint of the complainant alleging that on 15.08.2003 at about 7.00 PM in the evening, when he was returning to village from Bhatgaon market with his son Kamal Soni on the motorcycle and they reached near Bodri road then the accused/respondents who were seven in number committed robbery of 15 kg silver, 5 tola gold and cash Rs. 4000/- total worth of Rs. 1 lakh fro
Sections 451 and 452 of CrPC serve distinct purposes; ownership claims in recovered property must be substantiated by evidence, regardless of acquittal of accused.
The need for proving ownership of seized property and the presumption of unlawful possession in the absence of satisfactory explanation.
Mere recovery based on disclosure statements is inadequate to establish guilt; additional evidence linking recovered items to the crime is necessary.
The court upheld that the petitioner failed to substantiate ownership of confiscated goods, emphasizing the necessity for adequate inquiry under applicable provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedur....
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of evidence beyond reasonable doubt to secure a conviction.
(1) Where case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence, chain of evidence must be so far complete, such that every hypothesis is excluded but one proposed to be proved and such circumstances must s....
The admissibility of a confession under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and the mandatory provision of inflicting a fine under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
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
