Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Mukhlal Sao S/o Late Mahavir Sao – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD, J.
1. Since all the above-captioned appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, they are being heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. In these appeals filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. the appellants have challenged the legality, validity and propriety of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.02.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District Balrampur place at Ramanujganj, C.G. in Sessions Case No.83/2017, whereby and whereunder, the appellants stand convicted and sentenced as under:-
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that PW-1 Anand Gupta lodged information at Police Station Trikunda stating that on the morning of 21.07.2017, while he was in his shop at village Bagra, his father-Krishna Gupta (hereinafter called as ‘deceased’) had gone to plough the field situated at Bankheta. At about 02:00 p.m., his mother (PW-2 Lalti Devi, wife of the deceased) telephonically informed him that when she went to the field, she saw some unknown person assaulting his father/deceased and that person killed him and buried his head in the soil. On receiving
The conviction of accused cannot be sustained when circumstantial evidence lacks cogent linkage to the crime, and eyewitness testimony is deemed unreliable.
A mere presence in a mob does not equate to liability for criminal acts unless it is proven that the individual contributed to or shared the common object of the unlawful assembly.
Circumstantial evidence must create a complete and cogent chain linking the accused to the crime; mere suspicion, without proof beyond reasonable doubt, is insufficient for conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for circumstantial evidence to establish a complete chain of events leading to the only irresistible conclusion about the guilt of ....
The court ruled that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the need for corroboration and the benefit of doubt for the accused.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conclusive evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases based on circumstantial evidence.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence, including motive, in cases based on circumstantial evidence, and the evidence must be cogent, trustworthy, and exclude every possible hypo....
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
