Back
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Dhar, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against judgment dated 18.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kathua [‘the trial Court’ for short] whereby the appellants have been convicted of offences under sections 307/326 RPC. Challenge has also been thrown to order dated 20.08.2004 whereby in proof of offence under Section 307 RPC, the appellants have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, whereas, in proof of offence under Section 326 RPC, they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-.
2. It appears that the charge-sheet was laid against the appellants herein before the trial Court alleging therein that on 19.12.1995 at about 9.30 pm, the appellants, who were armed with a Toka, attacked injured PW Gulzar Ahmed while he was proceeding from PDD office, Basohli towards his residence at Chogan, Basohli, as a result of which, the injured PW Gulzar Ahmad received grievous injuries on his head, face and other parts of the body. According to the prosecution case, the assailants launched the aforesaid attack upon the injured with an intention t
The court ruled that conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, especially when relying on eyewitness testimony that is questionable due to factors such as the witness's proximity and the vic....
The appellate court found sufficient evidence to convict respondent No.1 for grievous injury despite contradictions in witness testimony, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny in cases with prior....
The testimony of an injured eyewitness is highly credible and generally accepted unless compelling evidence to discredit it is presented, as upheld in prior Supreme Court rulings.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and grievous hurt, emphasizing the reliability of eyewitness testimony and medical evidence in establishing guilt.
Minor discrepancies in witness testimonies do not undermine the prosecution's case when corroborated by medical evidence, and probation benefits are not applicable for serious offences like attempted....
Failure on the part of the prosecution to explain or disclose the genesis of the offence is also an additional factor which renders the prosecution story a bit doubtful.
Conviction affirmed – Offence of Murder - Prosecution evidence is trustworthy and prosecution has brought home the guilt of all the appellants by cogent, credible and trustworthy evidence.
Conviction for mass murder under 302/149 IPC set aside due to unreliable, contradictory ocular evidence from related witnesses; doubtful night identification, improbable presence/story; benefit of do....
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
