Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Mohan Singh @ Mohan Singh Ghatwar S/o Shri Pusan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.
1. The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) read with 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment of conviction dated 29.11.2016 and Order of sentence dated 30.11.2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Koderma, in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2011, whereby, the appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further S.I. for one year.
2. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan of informant Mostt. Chaity in which she has stated that she was maid servant of deceased S.K. Paul. On 27.02.2010 at about 4:00 a.m. she went to the house of the deceased S.K. Paul. At about 8:00 a.m. S.K. Paul, who was driver of Tower Wagon, left for duty. He returned from duty at about 4:00 p.m. and then again left for market at 5:00 p.m. He returned from market at around 6:30 p.m. He had brought meat from the market and told
Conviction in criminal cases must be based on proof beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on untrustworthy eyewitness testimony cannot sustain a conviction.
The conviction cannot stand if eyewitness testimony is contradictive and lacks corroboration, underscoring the necessity for reliability in criminal prosecutions.
Conviction under Section 302/34 IPC unsustainable on uncorroborated, contradictory testimony of interested sole eyewitness; benefit of reasonable doubt mandates acquittal where prosecution fails to p....
The conviction of the accused was overturned due to inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, primarily relying on the testimony of a witness which lacked corroboration and credibility.
Conviction can be upheld based on the reliable testimony of a sole eyewitness, irrespective of the presence of corroborating evidence or independent witnesses, as long as the evidence is credible.
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....
Conviction can be based on a sole eyewitness if credible, but significant inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to acquittal.
Conviction on sole eyewitness unreliable due to contradictions in assault manner/place, house layout inconsistency, suspicious family conduct; benefit of doubt where guilt not proved beyond reasonabl....
Conviction for murder by unlawful assembly sustainable on reliable sole eyewitness to killing, corroborated by medical evidence and abduction witnesses, despite FIR delay, witness non-examination, an....
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
