Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Shankar Lal Rathia, S/o. Goverdhan Rathia – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S.- Kharsiya – Respondent
Judgment :
Rajani Dubey, J.
1. Since the aforesaid appeals arise out of the same judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.07.2015 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No.20/2015, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
2. By the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under :
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 23.11.2014, an information was given in Police Station - Kharsia by informant Malti Bai (PW-1) to the effect that the dead body of an unknown person was lying under the Adhapathra Sokhanala canal bridge. On the basis of this information, police registered merg intimation (Ex.P-1). After due inquiry, the deceased was identified as Chetan Dansena. During merg inquiry, inquest on the body of deceased was prepared and dead body was sent for postmortem examination to Community Health Center, Kharsiya, where Dr. Naveen Agrawal (PW-5) conducted postmortem on the body of deceased and gave his report under Ex.P-9 opining the cause of death of deceased to be asphyxia as a result of strangulation and death was homicidal in nature. After receiving the postmortem r
Circumstantial evidence alone, without corroboration, is insufficient for conviction; inconsistencies in witness testimonies weaken the prosecution's case.
Circumstantial evidence alone, especially the last seen theory without corroboration, is insufficient for conviction; guilt must be established beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must prove homicidal death beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial evidence alone, including last seen theory, is insufficient for conviction.
Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient.
A conviction for murder based solely on circumstantial evidence, such as 'last seen together', requires a complete chain of evidence and cannot depend solely on suspicion or uncorroborated statements....
Conviction under IPC Section 302 cannot rely solely on circumstantial evidence of 'last seen together' without corroboration; mere suspicion is insufficient for guilt.
The main legal point established is the requirement for corroborative evidence to establish guilt, the limitations of the memorandum statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, and the inadmissib....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, especially when relying on circumstantial evidence, which requires stringent adherence to established evidentiary standards....
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
