Back
RAJNESH OSWAL, RAJESH SEKHRI
Sonu Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu & Kashmir – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Oswal, J. - This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.12.2013 and 31.12.2013 respectively passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) in file No. 33/Challan, titled 'State of J&K Vs. Deepak Singh and others' whereby the learned trial vide judgment dated 30.12.2013 has convicted the appellant for commission of offences under Section 302 and 452 RPC and acquitted the other accused and vide order dated 31.12.2013 has sentenced the appellant to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the commission of offence under Section 302 RPC and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for commission of offence under Section 452 RPC.
2. The appeal has been filed primarily on the ground that the learned trial court while convicting the appellant has not rightly appreciated the evidence.
3. Mr. R. K. Kotwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant vehemently argued that the learned trial court has convicted the appellant solely on the basis of statement of one witness i.e. PW-Bhim Singh, whose testimony was full of contradictions and contrary to the case projected by the prosecution. He fu
The conviction for murder was overturned due to significant doubts arising from procedural delays, witness credibility issues, and insufficient evidence meeting the standard of proof beyond reasonabl....
: Conviction can be recorded on the basis of statement of a solitary eye witness provided the witness is trustworthy.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony and failure to examine material witnesses led to the appellant's acquittal.
The suspicion, no matter how strong, cannot take the place of proof beyond reasonable doubt. An accused is presumed to be innocent unless proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, caution against relying solely on the testimony of a hostile witness, and the absence of conclusive evidence poi....
Circumstantial evidence – Principle applicable to circumstantial evidence requires that facts must be consistent with hypothesis of guilt of accused.
The importance of proving guilt beyond all reasonable doubt in cases relying on circumstantial evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and contradictions and doubts in the evidence can lead to the f....
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
