Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KARDAK ETE
Tajom Saroh, Son of Late Talem Saroh – Appellant
Versus
State of Ap Represented By The Pp Of Ap – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history and factual background of the criminal appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. trial court proceedings and evidentiary summary of the accused. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. contentions concerning evidence sufficiency and alleged confessional errors. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. evaluation of prosecution, defense evidence, and witness credibility. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 5. analysis of trial error regarding evidence appreciation and standard of proof. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 6. applying judicial precedent on circumstantial evidence and benefit of doubt. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 7. final order of acquittal due to lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT :
KARDAK ETE, J.
Heard Mr. P. Taffo, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the Appellant. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.03.2023 passed in Pasighat Sessions Case No. 06/2018, by the learned Sessions Judge, Pasighat, East S
Conviction modified to Section 304 A IPC as prosecution failed to prove that the accused acted with intent or knowledge to cause death; incident deemed accidental.
The absence of direct evidence proving intent or knowledge of causing grievous injury negates culpability under Section 304 IPC.
Point of Law : Deceased and Appellant were both inebriated and the quarrel between them was sudden and heated, it cannot be reasonably said that the Appellant has acted in an unusual manner.
Culpable homicide may be reduced to lesser charges under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC when death occurs due to injuries inflicted during a sudden fight without premeditation.
The court determined that the accused's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to the absence of premeditation and the nature of the altercation, altering the conviction fr....
cCnduct of the appellant, from the evidence led by the prosecution itself, indicates that neither was there any premeditation nor an intention to kill the deceased.
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
