Back
ANANDA SEN, GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Anil Uraon @ Oraon @ Anil Bhagat, son of late Shilvanus Oraon – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ananda Sen, J.
This Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction dated 30.11.2010 and order of sentence dated 06.12.2010 in Sessions Trial No. 325 of 2009 whereby and whereunder learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Fast Track Court X, Ranchi convicted the appellant under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and sentenced him to RI for life with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, further RI for 15 days for the charge under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and RI for 3 years with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, further RI for 15 days for the charge under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the conviction is based on the testimony of the sole witness i.e. PW7 and as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. DINESH” reported in (2018) 15 SCC 161 he could not have been convicted.
It is further argued that the Investigating Officer has not been examined in this case and the credibility of PW7 is in doubt. As per his deposition, he remained hidden and had seen the occurrence from the house of Jit
A conviction can be sustained on the testimony of a single eyewitness if deemed credible, despite challenges regarding corroboration and the absence of the Investigating Officer.
Conviction in criminal cases must be based on proof beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on untrustworthy eyewitness testimony cannot sustain a conviction.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; significant inconsistencies and investigative lapses led to reasonable doubt in the evidence presented.
The court emphasized that a single credible witness's testimony is sufficient for conviction, even with investigative lapses, provided it establishes the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt.
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....
Mere failure of the prosecution in producing reports from the Forensic Science Laboratory relating to the weapon of offence and the blood-stained earth and clothes would not derogate from the veracit....
Point of Law : Murder - Conviction set aside - Trial court has committed gross-error in believing the sole testimony of PW5 and conviction should not have been based on such type of testimony, which ....
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
