Back
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Pankaj Kumar Sahu, son of Sri Ganesh Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.
1. Heard Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned Spl.P.P. as well Mr. Awanish Shekhar, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 15.01.2019 passed by Shri Swarn Shanker Prasad, learned Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-Special Judge, C.B.I. (AHD)-cum-Special Court (CAW), Ranchi, in Sessions Trial No. 420 of 2017/T.R. No. 71 of 2017, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 307 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months.
3. The prosecution case arises out of the Fardbeyan of Shiv Brat Sahu recorded on 26.01.2017 wherein it has been stated that on the same day at 3.45 p.m. he was in his shop Krishi Kendra-cum-Anokhi Telecom along with his wife Basanti Devi when all of a sudden Pankaj Kumar Sahu (appellant) entered into his shop and started indiscriminate firing as a result of which he sustained two firearm i
The prosecution failed to establish the identity of the assailant beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The court emphasized the necessity of reliable witness testimony and corroborative evidence in criminal cases, particularly where previous enmity exists, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
Attempt to murder – Intention to kill must be apparent from act of accused.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence and contradictions in witness statements led to acquittal.
The court upheld the conviction based on consistent eyewitness testimonies that established the appellant's involvement in violent criminal activities leading to fatalities.
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of reliable evidence, leading to the reversal o....
The court established that the prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, affirming convictions under lesser charges while acquitting on more severe charges due to insufficient evidence.
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
