Back
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, AMBUJ NATH
Sukhu Sardar @ Suku Sardar, S/o Chamu Singh Sardar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Saket Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 13.06.2016 and order of sentence dated 15.06.2016 passed by Sri Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, learned Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 192 of 2009, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default in payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one year.
3. The fardbeyan of Singrai Bodra was recorded on 27.05.2009 to the effect that on 26.05.2009 his elder brother Fagu Bodra had gone to village Kerabir to watch Ashari Mela and Chhau dance and at 3:00 P.M, information was received that Fagu Bodra has been murdered. At this information, he left for village Kerabir alone and reached there at 5:00 P.M. On reaching village Kerabir he saw his brother lying on the ground at a distance of 100 yards from the house of the village Munda Chamu Sardar. His brother was found to be dead. He returned back home and on the next day he wen
A conviction cannot stand when there are significant contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, raising doubts about the prosecution's case.
The importance of ocular testimony over medical evidence and the application of Section 34 of the IPC in proving common intention.
The judgment underscores the principle that a conviction must be based on reliable and corroborated evidence, and that doubts in the prosecution's case must benefit the accused.
Conviction under IPC 302/34 upheld on reliable sole eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence and witnesses, despite minor discrepancies and non-examination of investigating officer/docto....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code to establish the shared common intention of the accused in committing the murder.
The necessity of proving the cause of death beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal trial.
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
