Back
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, AMBUJ NATH
Pankaj Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, learned A.P.P.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.09.2018 passed by Sri Dhananjay Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Seraikella in connection with S.T. No. 77 of 2011, arising out of Adityapur (R.I.T) P.S. Case No.283 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 796 of 2010, whereby and wherein, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III held the appellant, Pankaj Sahu, guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and thereby, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life alongwith a fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of six months for the offence under section 302 of Indian penal Code. Learned Court below further sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of seven years with a fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of six months for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 02.10.2010 at abou
The main legal point established in the judgment is that extra judicial confession and recovery of evidence are weak pieces of evidence and must inspire confidence. The prosecution must establish a c....
Extra-judicial confessions require corroborative evidence to ensure reliability; circumstantial evidence must present a complete chain connecting the accused to the crime without reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in murder cases, and rely on corroborative evidence for extra-judicial confessions.
.
The judgment emphasizes the requirement for complete and unimpeachable evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a case of circumstantial evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of circumstantial evidence, extra-judicial confession, motive, and the principle of last seen together to prove the guilt of the ac....
Circumstantial evidence must establish a complete chain of guilt beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so warrants acquittal.
Extrajudicial confession can support a conviction if credible, corroborated by other evidence, and satisfies standards for circumstantial evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, including bloodstains on the accused's clothing matching the victims' blood groups, to establish guilt in ....
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
