Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Ali Hussain, S/o. Late Rehman Ali – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Represented By PP Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA, J.
Heard Mr. P. Bora, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr.S. Bikash, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 29.09.2018 passed by the learned Addl. Session Judge, Bilasipara in Sessions Case No. 222/2011 convicting the appellants/accused u/s 323/324/325/34 IPC and sentencing the appellants/accused persons to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each i/d 1 month simple imprisonment u/s 323 IPC and further sentenced to undergo 1 year RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each i/d 2 months SI u/s 324 IPC and further sentenced to undergo 2 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each i/d 6 months SI u/s 325 IPC.
3. That the prosecution case in brief is that on 04.11.2008 at about 6 am informant Najrul Haque's brother-in-law Jabrul Haque went near a pond at the backside of his house to answer nature's call. At about that time, all the accused persons mentioned in the ejahar, namely, Ali Hussain, Rajiul Haque, Fakaruddin, Fatema Bibi, Monowara Bibi @ Monera Bibi and Nur Jahan armed with deadly weapons such as khukri, dao, stick et
The evidence of injured witnesses is credible and corroborated by medical evidence, affirming the conviction under IPC sections despite minor discrepancies in testimonies.
The court reaffirmed that injured witnesses have higher credibility, and corroborating medical evidence is crucial in establishing guilt in violent assault cases.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt; inadequate evidence resulted in the acquittal of the accused as intent to kill was not established.
Conviction upheld for grievous hurt under IPC 326, but quashed for attempted murder under IPC 307 due to lack of evidence of intent.
The court upheld the conviction of the appellants for murder, finding them part of an unlawful assembly with a common object, supported by consistent eyewitness and medical testimony.
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 IPC based on credible eyewitness testimony and established that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The court found discrepancies in witness testimonies, lack of medical evidence, and illegal recovery of weapons, leading to the acquittal of the accused under Section 302 IPC.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 324 IPC based on consistent eyewitness accounts, while acquitting one appellant due to evidence of his absence during the incident.
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
