Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Badhna Orang – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
1. Assail is made in this criminal appeal preferred from Jail under Section 383, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) to a Judgment and Order dated 30.04.2021 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Biswanath Chariali (‘the trial court’, for short) in Sessions Case no. 304 of 2012. By the Judgment and Order dated 30.04.2021, the learned trial court has convicted the six accused persons, namely, (i) Badhna Orang (A-1, for easy reference); (ii) Bhete Orang (A-2); (iii) Pradip Orang (A-3); (iv) Samra Orang (A-4); (v) Bablu Orang (A-5); and (vi) Amit Orang (A-5), who faced the trial for the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 148, IPC and on finding them guilty for the offence of Section 302, IPC, all of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for another 6 (six) months each, for committing the offence under Section 302, IPC. The accused persons are also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of paymen
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.
The testimony of a sole eyewitness can sustain a murder conviction if credible, consistent with medical evidence, and unshaken by cross-examination.
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.
Conviction under Section 302 cannot rest on sole eyewitness testimony riddled with contradictions, delay in naming accused, medical inconsistencies, and unnatural conduct; prosecution must prove guil....
Circumstantial evidence must establish a continuous chain linking the accused to the crime, and mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
(1) Proof of fact – Law does not contemplate stitching pieces of evidence in a watertight manner, for standard of proof in a criminal case is not proof beyond all doubts but only beyond reasonable do....
Point of Law : When there are eyewitnesses to prove the charge, failure on the part of the prosecution to establish every link in the chain of circumstance would become irrelevant.
Omissions in the statements of prosecution witnesses to the investigating officer, which are significant and relevant to the case, can amount to material contradictions that affect the credibility of....
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
