Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA
Babu Khan @ Salim son of Shri Sadulleh Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of appeals by parties (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. overview of charges and evidence presented (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. trial court findings on evidence (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. credibility of witness testimony and minor discrepancies (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. court's discretion in assessing trial verdict (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. final decisions on convictions and sentences (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
Order :
Criminal Appeal 541 of 1996 has been filed by the State of Rajasthan to challenge acquittal of Sattar Khan and Mumtaj Khan recorded in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1995.
2. Babu Khan @ Salim, who is the informant, had filed Criminal Revision No.307 of 1996 which was later on converted into Criminal Appeal No.277 of 2024. He has also challenged the judgment dated 10th July 1996 passed in Sessions Case No.11 of 1995 for two reasons viz (i) to challenge the acquittal of Sattar Khan and Mumtaj Khan and (ii) to challenge conviction of Rahman Khan for a lesser offence and not under section 302 of INDIAN PENAL CODE .
3. Rahman Khan is also aggrieved by the judgment of conviction under section 304 Part-I of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and award of sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine o
The court upheld the presumption of innocence and the trial court’s findings on witness credibility while ruling minor discrepancies in testimony do not invalidate overall evidence.
The court upheld the acquittal of two accused due to insufficient evidence while modifying the conviction of another from a higher to a lesser charge, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the....
The prosecution must establish charges beyond reasonable doubt, especially when witness credibility is in question.
Law is well settled that each and every incriminating circumstance must be clearly established by reliable and clinching evidence.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for compelling evidence to overturn such decisions.
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.
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
