Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, MARLI VANKUNG
Moni Kakati @ Bhupen Ch. Kakati Morigaon, Assam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam Rep. by PP, Assam – Respondent
Judgment :
(S.K. Medhi, J.)
The present appeal has been preferred from jail against the judgment and order dated 21.09.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon in Sessions Case No. 103/2017 (GR Case No. 3164/2016) under Sections 302 /201 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE [corresponding to Sections 103 /238 BNS ], thereby sentencing the appellant under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE [corresponding to Section 103 BNS ], to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) in default, further imprisonment for three months and also to undergo RI for three years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only in default further imprisonment for three months under Section 201 INDIAN PENAL CODE [corresponding to Section 238 BNS ]. The same involves the death of the minor son of the informant.
2. The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar by the mother of the deceased as PW2 on 06.12.2016. It has been alleged in the said Ejahar that on the previous day i.e., 05.12.2016, at about 03:00 PM, the appellant had called the 8 year old son of the informant, namely Siba Mahanta, to his shop and thereafter strangled him inside the shop and to conceal th
The absence of direct evidence and incomplete circumstantial proof precludes conviction, emphasizing that suspicion cannot substitute for conclusive evidence in a criminal trial.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain leading to the only conclusion of guilt, supported by credible witness testimonies and admissions by the accused.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a continuous chain linking the accused to the crime, and mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
The conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires an unbroken chain of events leading to the sole conclusion of guilt, with no room for reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of evidence that conclusively points to the guilt of the accused, and mere suspicion i....
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, the duty of the prosecution to establish guilt beyond all reasonable doubt, and the consideration of the appellant's mental condition in criminal cases.
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and coherent chain of events that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
The court upheld the conviction under IPC Section 302, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain, proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt without the accused providing an adeq....
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
