Back
ILESH J. VORA, S. V. PINTO
KAMALSINH @ KAMLESH DHANSINH NARUKA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ILESH J. VORA, J.
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-original accused no. 2 under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’ in short) against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.08.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 168 of 2013, wherein, the appellant alongwith accused no. 1 came to be tried for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 294(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short) and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 (‘G.P. Act’ in short).
2. At the end of the trial, the appellant came to be convicted under Sections 302 and 323 read with Section 114 of the IPC and was sentenced as under:
| Sections of IPC | Punishment | Fine | In default |
| 302 | Life imprisonment | Rs. 20,000/ - | SI for two months |
| 323 | SI for six months | -- | -- |
3. The facts leading to file the present appeal are as under:
The conviction under Section 302 IPC was upheld based on credible eyewitness testimony and established common intention among the accused.
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Rinkesh Goyal For the Respondent : Ajeet Singh Bhadoriya, Rajeev Upadhyay
Eyewitness testimony from related witnesses can be deemed credible and sufficient for conviction, even in the absence of independent corroboration, provided their accounts are consistent and reliable....
The testimony of eyewitnesses, especially injured witnesses, and the nature of injuries carry great weight in establishing guilt in criminal cases.
The court modified convictions from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the need for established common intention among accused, reflecting principles of reasonable doubt....
The court affirmed the conviction for murder under Section 302 and assault under Section 324, ruling that credible eyewitness testimonies and medical evidence met the burden of proof beyond reasonabl....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between culpable homicide and murder under the Indian Penal Code, and the assessment of the accused's knowledge and intention in....
The appellants were convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as the assault occurred without premeditation during a sudden quarrel, with shared common intention.
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
