Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
JOBIN SEBASTIAN
Azad, S/O.Saidu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
Jobin Sebastian, J.
This criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the judgment dated 31.05.2014 in Criminal Appeal No.144/2008 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Irinjalakkuda, which arose out of C.C. No.533/2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kodungallur. The revision petitioners herein are the first and second accused in the above case.
2. The prosecution case is that on 04.05.2005 at about 8:45 p.m., the accused, in furtherance of their common intention, placed a telephone post across the road with the intention of intercepting the motorcycle ridden by CW1 (PW6). On noticing the obstruction, when PW6 stopped the motorcycle, the first accused allegedly assaulted PW6 on his face with an iron stick, causing the loss of three teeth in the upper jaw and injuries to his lips and forehead. In the meantime, the second accused allegedly struck PW6 on his right lower leg with another iron stick, thereby causing fracture injuries. Thus, the accused are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Co
The testimony of an injured witness is highly reliable and does not require independent corroboration for conviction, and identification of a known assailant in court is sufficient evidence even in t....
Evidence from injured witnesses can carry substantial weight, although the existence of a prior civil dispute necessitates careful evaluation.
The court emphasized the special status of injured witnesses and affirmed the need for corroboration in cases involving motive from disputes.
An injured witness's testimony holds significant evidentiary value, and the absence of a test identification parade is not fatal to the prosecution's case if the witness had sufficient opportunity to....
Non-recovery of the weapon used in an offense is not fatal to the prosecution's case when reliable ocular eyewitness testimony is corroborated by medical evidence of the injuries sustained.
Revisional jurisdiction is supervisory and precludes reappreciation of evidence unless lower court findings are perverse. The non-recovery of a weapon is not fatal to a conviction for causing hurt wh....
The court's revisional jurisdiction is supervisory, limited to correcting miscarriage of justice; the testimony of an injured witness is highly credible, and a test identification parade is not stric....
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
