Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Setha Ram S/o. Naruram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Mehta, J.
1. The appellants herein have been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 28.10.2017 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Bikaner in Sessions Case No.42/2014:-
| Offence under Section | Sentences | Fine | Sentence in lieu of default of payment of fine |
| 302 IPC | Life Imprisonment | Rs.50,000/- | 6 month’s Additional S.I. |
| 201 IPC | 5 Years’ R.I. | Rs.5,000/- | 2 Months’ Additional S.I. |
| 120B IPC | Life imprisonment | Rs.50,000/- | 6 Months’ Additional S.I. |
| All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. | |||
2. They have preferred the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. for assailing their conviction and the sentences awarded to them by the trial court by the impugned judgment.
3. Briefly stated the facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant appeal are noted hereinbelow:-
4. Shri Krishan Ram (PW.6) submitted a written report (Ex.P/15) to the SHO, PS Kalu District Bikaner on 13.05.2014 at 01:30 pm alleging inter alia that his elder brother Ram Chandra left his home on
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, a complete and conclusive chain establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt is necessary; mere suspicion is insufficient.
The judgment underscores the necessity of a reliable chain of evidence in criminal cases, particularly when relying on circumstantial evidence for conviction.
The judgment emphasizes the requirement of reliable and substantive evidence to establish guilt, highlighting the insufficiency of recoveries alone to prove the accused's guilt.
Another important aspect to be considered in a case resting on circumstantial evidence is the lapse of time between the point when the accused and deceased were seen together and when the deceased is....
A conviction for murder based solely on circumstantial evidence, such as 'last seen together', requires a complete chain of evidence and cannot depend solely on suspicion or uncorroborated statements....
The judgment establishes the principle that the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt lies with the prosecution, and the use of circumstantial evidence must be complete and incapable of exp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the chain of events pointing exclusively to the guilt of the accused-appellant was not established based on circumstantial evidence.
The sufficiency and reliability of circumstantial evidence, including the last seen theory, motive, abscondence, and recovery of evidence, in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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
