Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
MITALI THAKURIA, PRANJAL DAS
Norbu Saidu, Son of Late Yongden Saidu – Appellant
Versus
State of AP and Anr. through the PP of AP. – Respondent
Judgment :
Pranjal Das, J.
1. Heard Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. G.Tado, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/Respondent No. 1 andMs. H. Jeram, learned Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No. 2 (informant).
2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and order dated 23.01.2024, whereby, the learned Sessions Judge for the Districts of East Kameng, West Kameng, Pakke Kesang and Tawang at Bomdilla in Sessions Case No. 08/2021 had convicted the Appellant under Section 302of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 20,000/-; conviction and sentence u/s 27(1) of the Arms Act for 7 years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 5,000/-.In default payment of fine, the appellant has directed to undergo 3 months’ simple imprisonment each. The sentences passed by the learned Sessions Judge, are to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 02/07/2020 at about 9 am, a FIR was received from one Asang Kasidu with allegations that on the intervening st nd nights of 1 and 2 July, 2020 at about 9:30 pm, one Sang Norbu Saidu, armed
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires establishing a complete chain of events proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and procedural issues do not negate overwhelming substantive evid....
The refusal of the accused to undergo TIP, the recovery of the weapon of offence, and the consistent testimony of eyewitnesses can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In a case of circumstantial evidence, the absence of motive is not always fatal to the prosecution case.
Eyewitness testimony and dying declarations of the victim were sufficient to establish guilt in a murder case, despite the absence of established motive.
The court confirmed the conviction for murder under IPC, establishing that motive and evidence proved the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while setting aside the conviction under the Arms Ac....
Conviction under IPC Section 302 and Arms Act Section 25 upheld due to credible direct witness testimony and supporting evidence, despite challenges to forensic integrity.
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
