Back
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., G. GIRISH
Nazeer, S/o. Habeeb Khan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Raja Vijayaraghavan. J.
The appellant in this case, Sri. Nazeer, a fish vendor, was arrayed as the accused in S.C.No.375 of 2011 on the file of the Special Judge for the Trial of Offences Against Women and Children (Additional Sessions Judge-I), Thalassery. He has been convicted under Sections 449, 392, and 302 of the IPC for murdering for gain, his neighbour, a 65-year-old spinster. By judgment dated 29.11.2017, the appellant was found guilty and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lakh under Section 302 of the IPC and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lakh under Section 392 of the IPC and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.75,000/- under Section 449 of the IPC and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
Background Facts:
2. The deceased was residing alone in the Taravad house, numbered VII/143, situated in Eranholy Panchayat. Ext.P15, the scene mahazar, provides a picture of the location and surroundings of the home of the
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt must benefit the accused.
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances and a motive for the crime to secure a conviction.
Circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain pointing solely to the guilt of the accused; confessions made in police custody are inadmissible unless they lead to the discovery of facts.
The principle that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain leading to the guilt of the accused, with no reasonable doubt remaining, was emphasized, highlighting the necessity for the prose....
(1) Murder – Proof of motive only adds to weight and value of evidence adduced by prosecution.(2) Evidence of a witness ought not be rejected only on the ground that he is a relative of injured/decea....
The necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, and the importance of establishing a clear connection between the accused and the....
Circumstantial evidence murder conviction cannot rest on solitary unproven recovery of stolen property without complete chain; accused's probable explanation on preponderance of probability entitles ....
The court emphasized the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, finding insufficient evidence to uphold convictions for murder and robbery.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a complete chain of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, with the prosecution bearing the burden of proof.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances beyond reasonable doubt to secure a conviction.
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
