Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Onkar Singh @ Konda S/o Asharam – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJANI DUBEY, J.
1. This appeal is preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.06.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gariyaband (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 23/2017, wherein the said Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him as under:-
| Conviction | Sentence |
| U/S 302 of IPC | For life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to undergo additional R.I. for 02 months. |
2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded from the impugned judgment and the records of the case, is that on 02.03.2017, on receiving information about a murder in village Onwa Ghanghtinala in the Police Station- Ghura, the station incharge went to the spot for verification and registered a dehati morgue intimation of the death of Narhar Dhruv and Kuntal Dhruv as told by Santosh Kumar, according to which the informant Santosh was asked by Kantilal Dhruv through mobile phone to come home early in the morning at about 8 am, he went to the brick kiln of Narhar Dhruv along with village’s sarpanch Pahad Singh, where the bodies of his younger brother Kuntal Dhruv and Narhar Dhruv of th
Conviction under IPC Section 302 cannot rely solely on circumstantial evidence of 'last seen together' without corroboration; mere suspicion is insufficient for guilt.
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.
In circumstantial murder cases, last seen theory alone cannot sustain conviction without complete evidentiary chain excluding innocence, especially with wide time gap allowing third-party interventio....
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 based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient.
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 burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, requiring all circumstantial evidence to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
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
