Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
ATUL SREEDHARAN, RAJESH SEKHRI
Mohammad Akram Wani – Appellant
Versus
State Th. Police Station Awantipora – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Atul Sreedharan J.
1. The present appeals have been filed by the Appellants who are aggrieved by the judgment dated 19/02/2021, passed by the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pulwama, in the case arising from FIR No. 96/2012 registered at Police Station, Awantipora. The case against the Appellants was instituted on11/09/2012 and decided on 19/02/2021 after a trial spanning eight years.
2. In Cr.A(D) No. 4/2021, Appellant No. 1 is Mohammad Akram Wani, Appellant No. 2 is Mohammad Ashraf Wani, Appellant No. 3 is Ishfaq Ahmad Wani and Appellant No. 4 is Mst. Zooni. Ishfaq Ahmad Wani, who has also filed a separate appeal which is Cr.A(D) No. 7/2021.
3. The Trial Court acquitted five accused persons and convicted the four Appellants herein. The Appellant No. 1 to 3, Mohammad Akram Wani, Mohammad Ashraf Wani and Ishfaq Ahmad Wani have been convicted for offences u/ss. 302 r/w 120-B and 201 IPC while the Appellant No. 4, Mst. Zooni has been convicted for the offence u/s.201 IPC.
4. Per prosecution, on 30/06/2012, Police Station, Awantipora received information from reliable sources that at Medora, one Farooq Ahmad Wani (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased
Confessions obtained under coercion are inadmissible, and the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case.
The court affirmed that all members of an unlawful assembly are liable for actions taken in support of their common objective, showcasing the interplay between direct and circumstantial evidence in e....
The conviction of the accused was overturned due to inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, primarily relying on the testimony of a witness which lacked corroboration and credibility.
Point of Law : Provision of Section 313 Cr.P.C. are to bring substance of accusation to accused so that he can explain every circumstance appearing against him during course of evidence and it is man....
The court ruled that circumstantial evidence and confessions were insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
For a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances that unerringly point to the guilt of the accused, and confessions made in police c....
A conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and unbroken chain, with reasonable doubt favoring the accused.
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
