Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, SANDEEP TANEJA
Chet Ram, S/o Birbal Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 374 , Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment and order of sentence dated 21.04.1995 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh, in Sessions Case No. 60/86 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Chetram), whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as below:
| Offence under | Sentence(s) | Fine(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Section 302 IPC | Life Imprisonment | Rs 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 1 month Rigorous Imprisonment. |
| Section 201 IPC | One year’s Rigorous Imprisonment | Rs 100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days Rigorous Imprisonment. |
| Section 379 IPC | Six months of Rigorous Imprisonment | - |
1.1. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1986 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1995.
2. The prosecution case, as unfolded in the oral report lodged on 07.08.1986 at about 5:00 PM by complainant Kaluram, is that his son Ramuram had been working as an agricultural labourer in the fields of Sardar Gurmel Singh, along with Birbal Meghwal of Longwala. It was stated that on 05.08.1986, in the morning, Ramuram had gone for work in the fields of Gurmel Singh
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; reliance on circumstantial evidence requires an unbroken chain linking the accused to the crime.
In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, each link must be established beyond reasonable doubt, with all evidence consistently pointing to the guilt of the accused.
The convicting based solely on circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confessions requires corroborative proof and must adhere to well-established principles regarding such evidence.
Conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and coherent chain of events that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and mere circumstantial evidence or suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain excluding reasonable doubt, and extra-judicial confessions require corroboration but can suffice for conviction if credible.
Circumstantial evidence – Principle applicable to circumstantial evidence requires that facts must be consistent with hypothesis of guilt of accused.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and unreliable eyewitness testimony cannot support a conviction.
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
