Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, MITALI THAKURIA
Shyamal Paul – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
1. This criminal appeal from jail under Section 383, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘Cr.P.C.’ or ‘the Code’ for short] is preferred against a Judgment and Order dated 22.12.2017 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Udalguri in Sessions Case no. 25[D-U] of 2012. By the Judgment and Order dated 22.12.2017, the accused-appellant has been convicted for committing the offence of uxoricide and on finding him guilty for the offence of murder, the accused-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another three months. The accused-appellant has also been found guilty for the offence under Section 201, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and for the offence under Section 201, IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. It has been ordered that the sentences are to run concurrently.
2. The case, Sessions Case No. 25[D-U] of 2012 arose out of Orang Police Station Case no. 55 of 2011 and corresponding G.R. Case no. 392 of 2011. One Bibhas Chandra Paul, as the informant, lodged a First Information Report
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, with the prosecution required to establish every link beyond reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, all links in the evidence chain must be established beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
It is a settled legal proposition that conviction of a person accused of committing an offence, is generally based solely on evidence that is either oral or documentary, but in exceptional circumstan....
In a murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence, multiple corroborative factors, including the last seen theory and absence of alternative explanations, can establish guilt beyond reasonable ....
(1) Circumstantial evidence – Where a case rests on circumstantial evidence, inference of guilt can be justified only when all incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with ....
For a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a clear chain of evidence that excludes reasonable doubt regarding the accused's guilt.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and mere circumstantial evidence or suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
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
