Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
State Of Assam, Rep. By The P.P., Assam – Appellant
Versus
Rajen Doley Jorhat, Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.D. Choudhury, J.
1. The Death Sentence Reference No. 1/2020 and Criminal Appeal No. 152/2020 & Criminal Appeal No. 153/2020 have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment & order.
2. By the impugned judgment dated 12.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Sessions Case No. 41/2013, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 125/2012 registered under Sections 302/143/201/364 of IPC, the appellants were convicted under Sections 302/143/201/364 of IPC and in Crl.A. No. 152/2020, the appellant, Shri Rajen Doley was sentenced to death for committing the offence under Section 302 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and in Crl.A. No.153/2020, the appellants, namely, (i) Shri Atul Doley (ii) Shri Biswa Patir (iii) Shri Baku Doley (iv) Shri Bimal Patir@ Birinchi (v) Shri Bamun Doley (vi) Shri Raju Doley (vii) Shri Lakhindra Patir Lotikai (viii) Shri Jan Doley (ix) Shri Janma Doley and (x) Shri Anil Doley, were sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand) e
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....
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.
Value of evidence as to confession depends on reliability of witness who gives evidence.
Circumstantial evidence, when complete and consistent, can sustain a conviction without direct eyewitness testimony; minor discrepancies in testimonies do not negate the prosecution's case.
Extrajudicial confessions must be voluntary and credible; reliance on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and conclusive chain excluding reasonable doubt for a conviction.
A conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and unbroken chain, with reasonable doubt favoring the accused.
Circumstantial evidence – Principle applicable to circumstantial evidence requires that facts must be consistent with hypothesis of guilt of accused.
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.
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
