Back
MUKTA GUPTA, POONAM A. BAMBA
Anil @ Bahuwa @ Hakla – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 06th July, 2018 whereby the appellant was held guilty for murder of one Ghan Shyam Prasad ("deceased"); and also the order on sentence dated 09th July, 2018, whereby the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life alongwith fine of Rs.50,000/- in default whereof, simple imprisonment for 6 months, for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"), and also for rigorous imprisonment for 5 years alongwith fine of Rs.20,000/- in default whereof, simple imprisonment for 2 months for offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
2. Briefly, the prosecution case is that on the intervening night of 11th- 12th November, 2015, the deceased alongwith Vijay (PW-3), Mritunjay (PW-5), and Asha Ram (PW-6) was gambling in front of H.No. D-6, Chowk CC Road, Parvesh Nagar, Mubarakpur, Delhi. The appellant came there on a black Pulsar motorcycle and threatened to steal their money and further threatened that if anyone opposed him, he would shoot that person. The deceased objected to this behavior of the appellant on which,
Conviction based on sole testimonies of witnesses requires corroboration and lack of corroborative evidence weakens the prosecution's case.
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for extreme caution in imposing capital punishment.
In a case of circumstantial evidence, the absence of motive is not always fatal to the prosecution case.
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the evidence should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the accus....
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete, unbroken chain of evidence. Improvements in oral testimonies, failure to link weapons through forensic reports, and recoveries from ....
The court emphasized the unreliability of eyewitness testimony from related witnesses, especially when recorded after significant delays, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Mere failure of the prosecution in producing reports from the Forensic Science Laboratory relating to the weapon of offence and the blood-stained earth and clothes would not derogate from the veracit....
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
