Back
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Mahendra Mahto, S/o Shri Tulsi Mahto – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.
Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathy, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, learned Spl. P.P. for the State as well as Mr. Vijiyant Verma, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 04.06.2019 (sentence passed on 07.06.2019) passed by Sri Rajeev Anand, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XIII, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 595 of 2015, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable u/s 302, 201 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life along with a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence u/s 302 of the IPC and in default in payment of fine to undergo further R.I. for one year and R.I. for three years for the offence u/s 201 of the IPC along with a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default to undergo further R.I. for six months. Both the sentences are to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution case arises out of the written report of Kalicharan Mahto, in which, it has been stated that the marriage of his sister Sheela Devi was solemnized with Mahendra Mahto (appellant) about twelve years back
The prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, a complete chain of circumstances must exist to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; absence of solid evidence results in exoneration.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain of circumstances leading to guilt; absence of concrete evidence raises doubt warranting acquittal.
(1) Murder – Life sentence – Law does not permit Courts to punish accused on the basis of suspicion alone – Greater the felony stricter the degree of proof.(2) Delay in lodging F.I.R. corrodes credib....
The court held that convictions must be supported by credible evidence, highlighting issues in witness identification and procedural failings that undermine the prosecution.
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, relying primarily on credible eyewitness testimony and corroborative forensic evidence, particularly in murder convictions.
The judgment emphasizes the need for clear and unimpeachable evidence to establish guilt in criminal cases, highlighting the importance of witness reliability and consistent 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
