Back
ANANDA SEN, GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Ram Prasad Hazam, son of late Bihari Hazam – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
This Criminal Appeal is preferred on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 07.08.2003 and order of sentence dated 11.08.2003 passed by Learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II, Khunti, in S.T. Case No.451 of 2000, whereby and wherein the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 306 IPC. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.2000/-under Section 306 IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. for the State at length and perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel representing the appellant submits that a false case was foisted against the appellant without any evidence whatsoever. There is no evidence that the appellant had instigated the deceased to commit suicide by administering poison. He submits that there is no eye witness of this incident, as out of the total five cited prosecution witnesses, no one was present during the last breath of the deceased. It is further submitted that P.W.-2 has been declared hostile. He further submits that the viscera of the deceased which was sent for FSL examination had been sent in an unsealed packet
Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires clear evidence of instigation or active involvement in the suicide, which was absent in this case.
Administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view wh....
For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aiding that compels suicide, which was not established in this case.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of mens rea and active instigation for conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, emphasizing the need for clear evidence to estab....
To convict for abetment of suicide under Section 306, there must be clear evidence of instigation, which was lacking in this case.
To convict for abetment of suicide, there must be clear evidence of the accused's intention to instigate or aid the victim's act, which was not present in this case.
Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires clear evidence of instigation or abetment, which was not established in this case.
The court reinforced that to convict for abetment of suicide, clear mens rea and direct acts of instigation must be evidenced, mere disputes are insufficient.
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
