Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MUKTA GUPTA, ANISH DAYAL
Vijay Saini @ Ram Singh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of case and conviction of appellant for murder. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments from appellant and prosecution regarding guilt. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's analysis on evidence and guilt confirmation. (Para 7) |
| 4. final judgment and dismissal of appeal. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Anish Dayal, J.
1. This appeal assails the judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 31st October, 2017 convicting the appellant for offences punishable under Section 302 IPC, Sections 25 (1B) (a) and 27(1) Arms Act and order on sentence dated 7th November, 2017 awarding the sentence of life imprisonment to the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC alongwith fine of Rs. 2000/-, rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 25 (1B) (a) Arms Act and fine of Rs. 1000/-, rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for offence under Section 27 (1) Arms Act and fine of Rs. 1000/-, additional rigorous imprisonment for 3 months in default of payment of fine. All sentences to run concurrently.
The impugned judgment of the learned Trial Court had also convicted two other co-accused Tabrez Ahmed @ Sameer and Ashraf Ali @ Fuddey for offence punishable under Section 212/34 IPC a
The court affirmed the appellant's conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence and established motive, highlighting the premeditated nature of the crime.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, including motive, presence at the scene, subsequent conduct, and recovery of the weapon, to prove the guil....
Criminal Law – Appeal against conviction – Theory of last seen – Reliability of - The last seen theory comes into play where the time gap between point of time when Accused and deceased were seen las....
The court confirmed that credible eyewitness testimony and recovery of weapon and stolen items are sufficient to uphold convictions under IPC sections for murder and robbery.
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 that circumstantial evidence must establish a complete and unbroken chain of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in capital cases.
In cases of circumstantial evidence, the chain of events must be complete and unbroken. Conviction cannot rest on inadmissible police statements or unverified recoveries. Failure to establish motive,....
The court ruled that circumstantial evidence must establish a consistent and unbroken chain linking the accused to the crime, and any reliance on unreliability of recovery evidence warrants the benef....
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
