Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Prahlad S/o Shri Siya Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Kusumunda – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellants challenging conviction and contextual facts. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments by appellants regarding false implication. (Para 6 , 7 , 9) |
| 3. state's response against appeal. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. determination of proof for offence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. evidence from witnesses supporting prosecution. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. legal standards of evaluating testimony. (Para 25 , 26) |
| 7. application of section 34 ipc in the case. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 8. affirmation of trial court's findings. (Para 29) |
| 9. modification of sentences imposed. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
JUDGMENT :
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
1. The appellants by way of this appeal have challenged the judgment dated 22.03.2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Korba (CG) in Sessions Trial No. 28/2004 whereby and whereunder, appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under :-
| Conviction u/S. | Sentence RI | Fine | In default of payment of fine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 458 IPC | 2 Years and 6 months | Rs. 1000/- | 4 months RI | |
| 323 IPC with Section 34 IPC | 6 Months | Rs. 500/- | 1 month RI | |
2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that the victim, Rukmani Bai, is the niece of Rajkumar as well as that of the accused persons Antaram and Pra
The conviction of the accused for house-trespass and causing hurt was upheld due to substantial eyewitness testimony and corroborating medical evidence, despite minor inconsistencies.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC, affirming that related witnesses' testimonies are credible and sufficient for establishing direct involvement in the crime.
The absence of visible external injuries does not preclude conviction for assault under Section 323 RPC.
Child witness – Children cannot be called to court and cited as witnesses unless it is very much essential and there were no other witnesses to prove the facts.
Point of Law - Non-examination of children was fatal to the prosecution case also does not appeal to reason. Children cannot be called to the court and cited as witnesses unless it is very much essen....
Point of Law : Non-examination of children was fatal to the prosecution case also does not appeal to reason. Children cannot be called to the court and cited as witnesses unless it is very much essen....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of clear and unambiguous charges to provide the accused with a precise notice of the accusations, and the need for sufficient and consistent evidence to support....
Conviction upheld under Section 304 Part-II IPC based on credible eyewitness testimony despite minor contradictions; intention to murder not established.
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
