Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Raghuveer Son Of Shri Lakhan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J.
1.This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 29.06.2016 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Dholpur (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) in Sessions Case No.88/2013 whereby, the accused- appellant (for short, ‘appellant’) has been convicted and sentenced as under:
Section 376(2)(i) IPC: Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/-; in default whereof, one year additional simple imprisonment.
Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/-; in default whereof, one year additional simple imprisonment.
Section 302 IPC: Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/-; in default whereof, one year additional simple imprisonment.
Section 201 IPC: Seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default whereof, one year additional simple imprisonment.
2. All the substantive sentences to run concurrently.
3. The relevant facts in brief are that Shri Mahendra Singh (PW1) submitted a written report dated 26.03.2013 at about 8:30 am to the Police Station, Kolari, District Dholpur stating therein that in the midnight of 25-26/03/2013 at about 12’ O clock when, he, alongwith his family, was sleeping i
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimony and doubts over evidence credibility can lead to acquittal.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, especially in capital cases; failures in fair trial procedures and unreliable circumstantial evidence undermine convicti....
The conviction based on circumstantial evidence is not sustainable without a complete chain of evidence, and undue delay in handling forensic samples raises integrity concerns.
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain of evidence that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
(1) Circumstantial evidence – Where a case rests on circumstantial evidence, inference of guilt can be justified only when all incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with ....
The judgment underscores the principle that the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly in serious offenses like kidnapping and murder.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
(1) DNA report is substantive piece of evidence and same could not have been tendered in evidence through affidavit – Only evidence of formal nature can be given on affidavits.(2) Circumstantial evid....
Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient.
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
