Back
MUKTA GUPTA, POONAM A. BAMBA
Satender Solanki – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Poonam A. Bamba, J.
1.0. Vide this appeal, the appellant is assailing the judgment dated 29.04.2019 (`impugned judgment' in short) passed by Ld. ASJ-02, Fast Track Court (FTC), New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302/307 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC' in short), in FIR/crime no. 317/1997, Police Station Civil Lines, Meerut, UP; and order on sentence dated 07.05.2019, whereby the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 IPC; the appellant was also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 307 IPC. The appellant was also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5 Lacs each to the LRs of the deceased/injured- his dependents, recoverable in the manner as provided in Section 421 Cr.PC
2.0. Briefly stating, the prosecution case is, that on 24.06.1997, one Inder Pal Dhaka along with Ash
The prosecution must prove the presence of a witness at the scene of the crime beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in the witness's testimony can raise doubts about the credibility of the evid....
The prosecution failed to establish the credibility of its key witness, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence.
Point of Law : The appellant shall be released from jail forthwith, unless wanted in any other case, subject to compliance of the provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C. to the satisfaction of the trial c....
The court upheld the conviction of three appellants for murder, emphasizing the credibility of eyewitnesses and the established motive, while acquitting two due to insufficient evidence.
Discrepancies in eyewitness accounts undermined the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to reasonable doubt of their involvement in the crime.
Merely, because they have not been examined is not a ground to disbelieve an otherwise credible ocular account rendered by a person injured in the incident whose presence, otherwise also, is natural ....
Eyewitness testimony, particularly from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, even with minor inconsistencies in their accounts.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If there is any doubt as to the guilt of the accused, the accused must be acquitted.
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
