Back
RATNAKER BHENGRA, AMBUJ NATH
Khaito Oraon son of late Inderdeo Oraon – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ratnaker Bhengra, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the State.
2. The appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment of conviction dated 22nd February 1999 and the order of sentence dated 24th February 1999 passed by the 2nd learned Additional Sessions Judge-Gumla in connection with Sessions Trial No. 294 of 1996 holding the appellants guilty for the offence under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo RI for life.
3. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan dated 29.07.1996 of the informant PW-3 Rajmati Kumari stating therein that she along with her father Ramsevak and cousin brother Ram Bilas Sahu went to Mahuwatoli Bazar for selling Mahuwa at 04:00 pm on 28.7.1996. At the bazar a dispute took place between her cousin brother Ram Bilas Sahu and the appellants. At 06:00 p.m. while she along with her father and cousin brother Ram Bilas were returning to their house and at 06:30 p.m. when they were on the kachha road some distance from Deepatoli on north side, all the appellants were standing there with hockey sticks started assaulting Ram Bilas Sahu. When her father went to res
Point of law: If direct evidence is satisfactory and reliable, the same cannot be rejected on hypothetical medical evidence
The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellants caused the victim's death, leading to their acquittal.
The admissibility of documents and witness testimonies is crucial in establishing a case beyond reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases, consistent and credible evidence is essential; discrepancies and reliance on related witnesses can undermine the prosecution's case and result in acquittal.
Criminal Law - Witnesses - Reliability of - Benefit of doubt - Evidence of PW-1 (informant) and PW-2 who are chance witnesses and claimed themselves to be eye witnesses of incident. Their evidence do....
Eyewitness testimony must be consistent and corroborated; convictions cannot rely solely on the testimony of closely related witnesses without independent verification.
A conviction cannot stand when there are significant contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, raising doubts about the prosecution's case.
Point of law: Sometimes even falsehood is given an adroit appearance of truth, so that truth disappears and falsehood comes on the surface.
Direct eyewitness testimony can establish guilt in murder cases, supported by physical evidence, where minor discrepancies do not diminish credibility.
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
