Back
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, MUNNURI LAXMAN
State Of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Bahadur Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
1. By way of the instant criminal appeal, the appellant-State has laid a challenge to the judgment dated 11.05.1994, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No.124/92 (State of Rajasthan v. Bahadur Singh and Ors.), whereby the accused-respondents were acquitted of the charges against them under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, while extending them the benefit of doubt.
2. At the outset, Mr. C.S. Ojha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-State drew the attention of this Court towards the order dated 23.02.1996 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court, which reflects that on
count of demise of the respondent No.3 herein, the instant appeal qua her stood abated on the said date itself.
2.1. Accordingly, the present adjudication is made only to the extent of surviving accused-respondents No.1 & 2, namely, Bahadur Singh and Gopal Singh, respectively.
3. The matter pertains to an incident which has occurred in the year 1992 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1995.
4. Brief facts of the case, as placed before the Court by learned Additional Government Advoca
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 court ruled that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the need for corroboration and the benefit of doubt for the accused.
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 for a conviction; mere conjecture is insufficient.
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence to prove 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
