Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Ilesh J.Vora, P.M.Raval
Sujata @ Babita Suresh Ganpatrav Abhang – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appeals and judgment (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defence arguments on evidence issues (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on circumstantial evidence (Para 7) |
| 4. legal principles from case law on evidence (Para 16 , 23 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 5. final judgment and acquittal (Para 32) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Both these appeals arise from the judgment and order of conviction dated 28.3.2014 passed in Sessions Case No.58 of 2011 by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara convicting both the appellants under sections 302, 201 and 34 of Indian Penal Code by imposing life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo further six months imprisonment and sentence under section 201 of Indian Penal Code for 7 years and also imposed a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo further simple imprisonment of six months. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. The facts of the case in nutshell are as follows :
3.2 After completion of investigation, the chargesheet against Yogesh Murlidhar Gite and Sujata @ Babita wife of the deceased Suresh Abhang was filed before the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate which came to be registered as
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove a complete and conclusive chain of circumstances to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances that excludes any reasonable doubt of the accused's innocence.
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 judgment establishes the importance of circumstantial evidence, the burden on the accused to explain incriminating circumstances, and the admissibility of electronic evidence under Section 65B(4)....
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and unbroken chain of evidence that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
Circumstantial evidence must be fully established beyond reasonable doubt, with the burden shifting to the accused after the prosecution proves its case.
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.
(1) Kidnapping, murder, conspiracy and disappearance of evidence – Brutality of offence does not dispense with legal requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Courts can convict accused only if ....
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to secure a conviction, and the burden of proof remains on the prosecution throughout.
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
