Back
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JOBIN SEBASTIAN
Raju M. A. @ Undachi Raju – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Rep. By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jobin Sebastian, J.
The accused in SC No.473/2015 (Crime No.314/2015 of Rajapuram Police Station) on the file of Additional Sessions Court-I, Kasaragod has preferred this appeal assailing the finding of guilt, conviction and sentence passed against him for offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.
2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows:
The accused driven by hostility towards his wife and following a quarrel, took his children to the neighbouring house bearing No.IX-511 of Panathadi Grama Panchayat and committed murder of his son, Rahul, aged 3 years, by strangulation and also by assaulting him with a coconut scraper on 21.07.2015 at about 9.30 p.m.
3. On completion of the investigation, the final report was submitted before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg. Being satisfied that the case is one triable exclusively by a Court of Session, the learned Magistrate after complying with all the necessary formalities committed the case to the Court of Session, Kasaragod. After taking cognizance, the learned Sessions Judge made over the case for trial to Additional Sessions Court-I, Kasaragod. After trial, the accused was found guilty for offence p
The court upheld the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, affirming the reliability of eyewitness testimony and rejecting claims of the accused's insanity.
The court highlighted the necessity of corroborative evidence in witness testimonies, particularly concerning juvenile witnesses.
The court affirmed a conviction under Section 302 IPC, emphasizing reliance on eyewitness testimony and the sufficiency of direct evidence over the need for motive in murder cases.
It would always be open for prosecution to decide on quality and quantity of evidence that they wish to lead in order to establish charge and this Court cannot comment on such aspect of matter, as lo....
The conviction for murder was upheld based on substantial eyewitness testimony and evidence of motive, affirming the principle that direct evidence substantiates a guilty verdict beyond reasonable do....
The testimony of close relatives in domestic crimes is valid and can establish guilt when consistent and corroborated by medical evidence; intention to kill may be inferred from the nature of the att....
As the attack is an outcome of the said incident, which took place immediately prior to the incident, we feel that it is a fit case where the nature of offence has to be scaled down from Section 302 ....
The court clarified that common intention under Section 34 IPC requires clear evidence of prearranged plans, leading to the first accused's conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 while ac....
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
