SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
Anirudh Kumar Nayak, S/o. Late Budhwa Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to acquittal and conviction in murder cases. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. medical evidence corroborates eyewitness accounts. (Para 4 , 27 , 29) |
| 3. empty allegations without credible evidence do not suffice. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. observations on reliability and motivations of witnesses. (Para 8 , 17 , 40) |
| 5. role of alibi and indirect evidence in proving guilt. (Para 9 , 32 , 34) |
| 6. identification of the accused and their potential involvement. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 7. witness testimony must be taken as a whole. (Para 14 , 16 , 18) |
| 8. standards for evaluating conflicting witness statements. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
Shree Chandrashekhar, J.
Acquittal Appeal (DB) No. 29 of 2020 has been filed by Anirudh Kumar Nayak who is the informant of Namkum PS Case No.198 of 2013. He has challenged the judgment of acquittal of Bijay Nayak, Dharma Nayak, Ajay Nayak, Sikandar Nayak, and Ram @ Vijay Nayak recorded in Sessions Trial Case Nos.49 of 2014 and 102 of 2014.
2. Binod Nayak, Gurucharan Nayak, and Lalu @ Sanjay Nayak who were also put on trial along with the above-named accused have challenged their conviction under section 302/34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and section 27(1) of th
Deep Chand & Ors. v. State of Haryana
Major Som Nath v. Union of India
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra
Jayantilal Verma v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh)
State of U.P. v. Sahai and Ors.
Bhagwan Singh v. State of Haryana
Sk. Sattar v. State of Maharashtra
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.