Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, BUDI HABUNG
Rabhidhan @ Rabidhan Chakma S/o Lt. Bhagya Kr. Chakma – Accused/Convict Through; Mrs. Bini Chakma – Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh, represented by the Addl. P.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background detailing the case and prosecution. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments against conviction based on lack of evidence. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's observations regarding evidence and legal standards. (Para 15 , 16 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 4. legal reasoning and conclusions drawn by the court. (Para 24 , 34) |
| 5. final conclusion and decision of the court. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
Budi Habung, J.
Heard Mr. Tabit Tapak, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr.Gyati Tado, learned Additional Prosecutor for the State respondent No.1.
2. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.05.2021 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Tirap, Changlang & Longding at Khonsa, whereby the accused was convicted in Khonsa Sessions Case No. 191/2019, corresponding to Diyun P.S. Case No. 24/1999, under Sections 302 , 380, and 201 of the IPC. The appellant was sentenced as follows:
i. To undergo life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) for the offence under Section 302 IPC;
ii. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand)
A conviction cannot solely rely on a retracted confession without corroborative evidence; circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC was upheld based on circumstantial evidence demonstrating a complete and unbroken chain leading to the appellant's guilt.
Murder conviction upheld on circumstantial evidence via complete chain: homicidal death, last seen together, false explanation, body concealment, corroborated confessions, medical proof of fatal inju....
The admissibility and truthfulness of confessional statements, the fair examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and the requirement for corroborative evidence to establish guilt beyond ....
The court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC, emphasizing that the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident fell within Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
The court established that a sole confessional statement from a co-accused cannot be the basis for a conviction without corroborating evidence; the absence of eyewitnesses and substantial proof resul....
Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and circumstantial evidence needs a complete chain indicating the accused's guilt; extra-judicial confessions require corroboration and cannot so....
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires substantial corroboration, particularly with confessions, where voluntariness and trustworthiness must be proven to avoid wrongful convictions.
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....
The court established that mere suspicion cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt, especially in circumstantial evidence cases.
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
