PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, MUNNURI LAXMAN
State Of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Angrey Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.) :
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant-State claiming the following reliefs:
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1991 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1995.
3. The appellant-State laid a challenge to the judgment dated 28.10.1992 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, in Sessions Case No.31/91 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Angreysingh), whereby the present accused-respondent Angrej Singh has been acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC.
4. As the pleaded facts and the record would reveal, at around eight kilometres away from the Police Station, Vijay Nagar, there existed a Chak namely, 3 BL, where Choto (wife of the accused-respondent) was residing, due to uncord
Mallappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 1162/2011
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 985/2010
The judgment establishes that an appellate court can reverse an acquittal if the trial court misreads or omits material evidence, leading to a miscarriage of justice.
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in witness testimonies, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence and unreliable eyewitness testimonies, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, emphasizing the burden of proof on the prosecution.
The prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so results in acquittal.
The presumption of innocence is paramount, and appellate courts must respect trial court findings unless clear errors are demonstrated.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence to eliminate reasonable doubt concerning the accused's guilt.
The presumption of innocence and the burden of proof require that the prosecution must establish intent and sufficient evidence for a murder conviction.
Point of Law : Criminal Law - Offence of Murder - Conviction confirmed - Where there is ample, unimpeachable ocular evidence corroborated by medical evidence, non recovery of weapon of offence does n....
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and credibility of eyewitnesses is essential for conviction.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.