Back
ILESH J. VORA, S. V. PINTO
DEEPAKBHAI BACHUBHAI PRAJAPATI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. These appeals have been filed by the appellants-original accused under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order dated 07.08.2018 passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara (here in after referred to as the “learned Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 07 of 2015. The appellants-original accused no. 1-Dipakbhai Bachubhai Prajapati and accused no. 3-Ganesh @ Ganu @ Ganio Nilkanth have filed Criminal Appeal No. 1596 of 2018, appellant-original accused no. 4-Subhas Rajendra @ Umajirav Barokar has filed Criminal Appeal No. 1397 of 2018 and appellant-original accused no. 2-Abdul @ Munno @ Thumsup Rahemanbhai Shaikh has filed Criminal Appeal No. 1442 of 2018 and all the appeals have arisen out of the same impugned judgment and order and hence, are disposed of by this common judgment.
The appellants are referred to as the accused in the rank and file as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts necessary to decide the appeal are in a nutshell as under:
The prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, lacking sufficient evidence to prove motive or a complete chain of circumstantial evidence.
The court affirmed that circumstantial evidence, when established beyond reasonable doubt, can support convictions for murder and conspiracy, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of evidence....
(1) Circumstantial evidence – It is necessary for prosecution that circumstances from which conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. Suspicion, however strong it may be, cannot....
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....
Circumstantial evidence, including recovery of crucial items, must be coherent and consistently point to guilt to meet the burden of proof required for conviction in murder cases.
The conviction of the appellants for murder and conspiracy was upheld based on circumstantial evidence, establishing a common intention to kill for financial gain through witchcraft.
The judgment establishes that circumstantial evidence must form a complete, unbroken chain directly linking the accused to the crime, which warranted a life sentence in this case.
Murder conviction upheld on eye-witness testimony of coordinated sharp weapon and firearm assault, corroborated by medical/ballistic evidence and circumstances; weapon recovery under Evidence Act Sec....
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
