ANANDA SEN, SUBHASH CHAND
Sanjay Kujur son of Late Prem Kujur – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Ananda Sen, J. Today this appeal was listed for consideration of bail plea of the appellant after suspending the sentence.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant argued the entire case on merits. He has taken this Court through the First Information Report, in details and also through the evidence of all the witnesses and also the documents, which have been exhibited. He submits that from the evidence on record and from the materials no case against the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. He argues that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts, thus, he be released on bail.
3. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the appellant. He also argues the entire appeal on merit while opposing bail.
4. Considering the arguments of the appellant and the State, wherein they have argued each and every point and taken us through all the evidence, we feel that the entire appeal can be heard finally at this stage. Further, this appeal has already been admitted for final hearing and the Trial Court Record is already with us and both the State and the Appellant hav
Raja Naykar versus State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2024) 3 SCC 481
Mustkeem versus State of Rajasthan reported in (2011) 11 SCC 724
Rajinder Singh versus State of Haryana reported in (2013) 15 SCC 245
Satye Singh versus State of Uttarakhand reported in (2022) 5 SCC 438
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and a conviction cannot be based solely on the recovery of a murder weapon without corroborative evidence.
A conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code requires credible evidence beyond reasonable doubt, including corroborative evidence when relying on confessions or weapon recovery.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a continuous chain linking the accused to the crime, and mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the testimony of witnesses, even if related to the deceased, should not be automatically discarded, and minor discrepancies in the evidence sh....
The judgment establishes the principle that the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt lies with the prosecution, and the use of circumstantial evidence must be complete and incapable of exp....
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain conclusively proving guilt; failure to provide plausible explanations by the accused strengthens the case for conviction.
The court affirmed that in cases of circumstantial evidence, the accused's failure to explain facts within their knowledge can lead to a presumption of guilt under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
The burden of proving facts within the special knowledge of an individual under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, and the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt in a criminal....
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused bears the burden of proof for facts within their knowledge.
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.