Back
ILESH J. VORA, S. V. PINTO
Mohan Sundershan Nair – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellants – original accused nos. 1 to 5 and 7 under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’, in short) against the judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.02.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Surat in Sessions Case no. 284 of 1997, wherein, the appellants came to be tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 436, 427, 323 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (old) ('IPC', for short). The trial Court, after appreciation of the evidence, convicted the appellants and they were sentenced as under:
| Accused | Sections of IPC | Punishment | Fine | In default |
| Accused no. 1 to 5 and 7 | 147, 148, 149, 436 and 427 | RI for two years | Rs.5000/- | RI for two months |
| Accused no. 5 | 323 | RI for six months | Rs.1000/- | - RI for one month |
The sentences were to run concurrently for original accused no. 5.
2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file this appeal are as under:
2.1 The appellants – accused were tried by the Sessions Court for the charge that
The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable witness testimonies, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused due to significant inconsistencies and contradictions in witness testimonies.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimony led to acquittal of appellants.
The appellate court can set aside a trial court's finding of acquittal if it finds that the finding is perverse and against the weight of evidence.
The court affirmed the conviction of the accused for murder, finding sufficient evidence of an unlawful assembly and individual culpability amid claims of inconsistencies in prosecution testimony.
The assembly of individuals armed with deadly weapons, with a common intent to commit violence, constitutes an unlawful assembly under IPC, leading to vicarious liability for all members.
Presence in an unlawful assembly suffices for liability, affirming that minor discrepancies in testimonies do not negate the prosecution's case.
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
