Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, D.M.VYAS
Smitaben Naranbhai – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Respondent nos.2 to 4 are the accused nos.1 to 3 in Sessions Case No.23 of 2017 on the file of learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot. They were prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 201, 34 and 120- B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 135 (1) of the GUJARAT POLICE ACT . Eventually, after full-fledged trial, the trial Court did not find them guilty for the said offences and they were acquitted of the said charges.
2. The appellant, who is the defacto complainant, is the mother of the deceased, being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of acquittal, preferred present appeal, challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment of acquittal. The State did not prefer any appeal against said judgment of acquittal.
3. When the appeal came up for hearing for admission, we have heard Mr.Pratik Jasani, learned counsel for the appellant at length and Ms.Krina Calla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent-State. We have perused the material available, from the paper book that is supplied by learned counsel for the appellant.
4. Briefly stated, it is the case of the prosecution that a person by name Dipesh is the son of
Circumstantial evidence in murder convictions requires a complete chain of proof beyond reasonable doubt, and absence of direct evidence or crucial witnesses undermines the prosecution's case.
Circumstantial evidence can support a murder conviction if it forms a complete chain of circumstances leading to guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the accused's conduct and failure to explai....
Convictions under circumstantial evidence require a complete and unbroken chain of proof; mere suspicion is insufficient for establishing guilt.
The absence of direct evidence and incomplete circumstantial proof precludes conviction, emphasizing that suspicion cannot substitute for conclusive evidence in a criminal trial.
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbreakable chain of events to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence leading to the only conclusion of guilt for a conviction to be sustainable.
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove a complete and conclusive chain of circumstances to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
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
