Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ
Ranjith S/o Raveendran – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN, J
These appeals are filed by accused Nos.1 to 5 and 8 in SC No.754/2018 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court, Irinjalakuda, challenging their conviction and sentences imposed by that court. As per the impugned judgment accused Nos. 1 to 5 & 8 were found guilty, convicted and sentenced under Sections 143,147, 323, 324, 326, 307, 450, 302 read with Section 149IPC ., accused Nos. 1 to 5 were found guilty, convicted and sentenced under Section 148 read with section 149 IPC and accused Nos. 1 to 3 & 5 were convicted and sentenced under Section 120(B) read with Section 302 IPC . Criminal Appeal No.986/2021 is preferred by the 1st accused, Crl.Appeal No.570/2021 is preferred by the 2nd accused, Crl.Appeal No.511/2021 is preferred by third accused, Crl.Appeal No.887/2021 is preferred by the 4th accused, Crl.Appeal No.479/2021 is preferred by the 5th accused, and Crl.Appeal No.237/2023 is preferred by 8th accused.
Prosecution Case
2. Accused Nos. 1 to 11, 13 and a Juvenile in conflict with law, entered into a criminal conspiracy to do away with one Vineeth, the son of the deceased and, as a part of conspiracy on 27/5/2018 at about 11.15 pm, formed themselve
Eyewitness testimony is credible and sufficient for conviction in murder cases, even without a test identification parade, and minor inconsistencies in the first information statement do not undermin....
The court upheld the conviction of the first accused for murder while acquitting the second and third accused due to insufficient evidence of their involvement or common intention.
Murder case - Conviction - murder of deceased which is proved beyond any reasonable doubt against A1 - But at the same time the Prosecution could not prove any overt act or active involvement of any ....
(1) While appreciating evidence in criminal cases, there cannot be a strait-jacket formula. Evidence must be appreciated from perception of a prudent common man.(2) Conduct of a stranger eyewitness t....
The testimony of relatives is not inherently suspect and can be reliable if corroborated by evidence, while conspiracy requires proof of prior agreement, which was lacking in this case.
The prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of evidence linking the accused to the murder, leading to the reversal of their conviction.
The court established that while the prosecution failed to prove conspiracy, sufficient evidence existed to convict certain accused of murder and related offences.
The court upheld the conviction of the accused for murder and related offences based on credible eyewitness testimony, while acquitting them of charges under the Arms Act due to insufficient evidence....
The judgment emphasizes the requirement for evidence to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the importance of fair investigation, and the reliability of witnesses.
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
