IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Om Narayan Verma, S/o. Ramanand Verma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through : The Station House Officer, Patharia – Respondent
Judgment :
Rajani Dubey, J.
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.05.2019 passed by Sessions Judge, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.), in Sessions Trial No.72/2017 convicting the accused/appellants under Sections 201, 364, 302/34 and 120-B of IPC & sentencing them to undergo R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5,000/-, imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.10,000/- and R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- respectively, plus default stipulations.
2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 14.06.2017 at around 5.00 PM, accused Om Narayan (A-1) called Bisahu Ram Verma on mobile phone to Beltukri (Sambalpur) turn saying that he will return the amount borrowed by him. Bisahu Ram Verma went there on his call, whom accused Om Narayan seated him on his motorcycle Passion Pro bearing registration No. CG-07-AJ-9076 and accused Om Narayan's friend accused Sachchidanand (A-2) seated Uttara Kumar on his motorcycle Hero Honda CD Dawn and all four of them went to Bhatapara. They watched a movie at Bhatapara City Mall at 6-9 pm. After the movie was over, all four of them brought liquor and came near the



Prakash Nishad alias Kewat Zainak Nishad Vs. State of Maharashtra
Chunthuram Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
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....
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 under IPC Section 302 cannot rely solely on circumstantial evidence of 'last seen together' without corroboration; mere suspicion is insufficient for guilt.
Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient.
Circumstantial evidence alone, without corroboration, is insufficient for conviction; inconsistencies in witness testimonies weaken the prosecution's case.
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....
Conviction for murder can be sustained based on circumstantial evidence and the last seen theory, particularly when the accused fails to explain crucial circumstances.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the last seen theory and the accused's failure to explain the circumstances of the death.
A conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and conclusive chain of circumstances that excludes any reasonable doubt regarding the accused's innocence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.