Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, ROBIN PHUKAN
Abdul Sukkur – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manish Choudhury, J.
The instant criminal appeal from Jail under Section 383, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘the CrPC’ or ‘the Code’, for short] is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 12.06.2017 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj at Karimganj [‘the trial court’, for short] in Sessions Case no. 46/2016 [The State of Assam vs. Sri Abdul Sukkur]. By the Judgment and Order dated 12.06.2017, the accused-appellant has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for another period of 2 [two] months.
2. We have heard Mr. L. Devi, learned Amicus Curiae for the accused-appellant and Ms. S.H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State of Assam.
3. Ms. Devi, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the accused-appellant has submitted that out of the 7 [seven] nos. of prosecution witnesses, only one witness, that is, P.W.2 appeared to be present at the place of occurrence in and around the time when the incident had happened. P.W.2 and two other prosecution w
The prosecution must prove the case for murder beyond reasonable doubt, and lack of supporting evidence can lead to the benefit of doubt for the accused.
The prosecution failed to prove the charges of murder and unlawful assembly beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence.
Point of Law : conviction cannot be based on the evidence of hostile witnesses and their testimony has to be discarded and the infirm witnesses cannot corroborate each other.
The importance of credible eyewitness testimony, reliable and clinching evidence, and the exclusion of every possible hypothesis except guilt in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, caution against relying solely on the testimony of a hostile witness, and the absence of conclusive evidence poi....
The evidence from hostile witnesses can be accepted if it supports the prosecution's case; the prosecution proved the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based on witness testimonies and materi....
The testimony of a sole eyewitness can sustain a murder conviction if credible, consistent with medical evidence, and unshaken by cross-examination.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt for a murder conviction, and suspicion alone cannot substitute for proof.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under Section 302 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
