Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, K. SEMA
Radha Mohan Hajong Baksa, Assam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Medhi, J.
The instant appeal has been preferred from jail against the judgment dated 12.04.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Baksa, in Sessions Case No. 52/2018 (Old No. 46/2017), whereby, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for life with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand), in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for six months under Section 302 IPC .
2. The same involves the death/killing of the wife of the appellant, who was accused of such offence.
3. The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar on 25.09.2016 by PW-3, who is the brother of the deceased. It has been stated that at about 3.40 pm on that day when his younger sister was working in the house, the appellant had suddenly hacked her on her neck by means of a Dao as a result of which she fell on the ground and died on the spot. It was stated that he came to know about the same when the neighbours immediately came there and the accused went to the Police Station taking along the Dao. Based on the aforesaid Ejahar, the formal F.I.R. was registered and investigation
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete and unbroken chain to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
Circumstantial evidence, coupled with a lack of alibi or credible explanation from the appellant, sufficiently establishes guilt in a murder conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confessions can sustain a murder conviction, provided they form a complete chain, even without eyewitness testimony.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt through an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
There was no eye witness as to actual assault on body of deceased which lead to her death and as such, it can be said that conviction of appellant is based on circumstantial evidence.
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain of evidence that excludes every reasonable hypothesis except guilt; suspicion alone is insufficient for conviction.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a continuous chain linking the accused to the crime, and mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
Point of Law : Criminal Law – Offence of Murder - Examination of witnesses by police - No doubt correct that materials on record indicated that accused had surrendered before Police Station and had r....
The court ruled that circumstantial evidence must establish an unbroken chain of events to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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
