Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, SUSHIL KUKREJA
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Satnam Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prosecution alleges accused caused death by heroin injection. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. state contests acquittal; defence upholds trial judgment. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. appellate interference limited if acquittal view possible. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. evidence contradictions and gaps fail proof beyond doubt. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. appeal dismissed upholding trial court acquittal. (Para 23) |
The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against judgment, dated 27.12.2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Una, District Una, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2014, whereby the accused persons (respondents herein) were acquitted under Sections 304, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) and Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short “NDPS Act”).
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, can be summarized as under:
2(a). On 23.05.2014 complainant Shri Pargat Singh got recorded his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C., wherein he stat
Appellate courts should not interfere with acquittal if trial court's view is reasonably possible, reinforced by double presumption of innocence; reversal only if perverse or compelling circumstances....
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the principle that two reasonable views should not disturb the trial ....
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the prosecution's failure to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The judgment reaffirms the principle of presumption of innocence, the need for clear evidence in cases of abetment of suicide, and the reluctance to disturb a trial court's finding of acquittal unles....
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for clear evidence of guilt, reaffirming that if two reasonable conclusions are possible, the one ....
Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires direct evidence of intent or proximate acts by accused to abet suicide, with appellate courts deferring to trial findings unless clearly perverse.
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
