Back
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Bhopal Das, S/o Late Bhairab Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. S.A. Ahmed, learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Assam.
2. This appeal is preferred by the accused, Bhopal Das (hereinafter referred as the appellant) against the Judgment & Order dated 20.01.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Karbi Anglong, Diphu in Sessions Case No. 98/2016 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short). The appellant was convicted under Section 304 Part-1 IPC to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-with default stipulation.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant laid stress in his argument that the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant on the basis of sole eye-witness. The evidences of other witnesses are nothing but hearsay evidence. Contradictions lends a benefit of doubt to the appellant.
4. Per contra, the learned Additional P.P. Mr. K.K. Das laid stress in his argument that PW-3 is an eye-witness who has categorically testified that the appellant hit the deceased with a bamboo stick. He dealt a blow on the head of the deceased with a bamboo stick. This evidence is substantiated by the evidence of th
The court upheld the conviction based solely on one credible witness's testimony, affirming that quality of evidence is more critical than quantity in criminal cases.
Point of law: It is true that the injury possible by fall on hard surface but depending on the force. It is true an alcoholic may sustain easily the rupture of blood vessels even at the slightest vio....
A conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC was adjusted to culpable homicide under Section 304 due to ambiguities in witness accounts and lack of intent, establishing a precedent for interpreting ....
The Court upheld the life imprisonment conviction under Section 302 IPC, affirming the case as murder due to the absence of sudden provocation and corroborative evidence supporting the eyewitness's t....
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-I, considering the absence of prior intent and planning.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal provisions related to murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under the IPC.
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
