Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, BUDI HABUNG
Dorjee Tsering – Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT AND ORDER :
(S.P. Khaund, J.)
Factual Matrix :
1. This appeal is preferred by Sri Dorjee Tsering ( hereinafter referred to as the appellant or accused) against the judgment and order dated 20.09.2022 in connection with Sessions Case No.2/ 2021 ( arising out of Dirang PS Case No.15/2020), passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Bomdila, West Kameng District, convicting the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (‘ IPC ’ for short ) to undergo Imprisonment for Life and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-, with default stipulation, and under Section 201 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7(seven) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, with default stipulation. The sentences are to run concurrently.
2. The allegation against the appellant is that on the evening of 22.09.2020 at Lubrang village, Pem Sangey (herein after also referred to as the deceased) and Lopa @Pema Wangda went to visit Dor Passang in his residence and after some time Dorjee Tsering (hereinafter referred to as accused) came and joined them. They are all residents of Lubrang village, which is a small community consisting of 190 residents. They were all drinking Araa (local alcoholic drink) and thereaft
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence for conviction; extrajudicial confessions lack evidentiary value if not proven voluntary.
Circumstantial evidence must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, with clear, cogent connections to establish guilt; the accused's release is warranted when gaps exist in prosecution evidence.
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....
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration to be reliable.
Value of evidence as to confession depends on reliability of witness who gives evidence.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration to be credible.
The prosecution failed to establish a sufficient chain of circumstantial evidence to link the appellant to the murder, leading to acquittal.
Provisions of Section 106 of Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and categoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within knowledge of a person, burden of proving that fact is upon him.
In circumstantial evidence cases, each link in the evidence chain must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, supported by all proving consistent guilt without alternative explanations.
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
