Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, AMBUJ NATH
Soma Bading, S/o Sawan Bading – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.
1. Heard Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Suraj Verma, learned Spl. P.P.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgement and order of conviction and sentence dated 22-03-2014 (sentence passed on 25.03.2014) passed by Sri Kaushal Kishor Jha, No.1, learned Principal Sessions Judge, Simdega in S.T. No. 84/2010, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default in payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months.
3. The prosecution case arises out of the fardbeyan of Santosh Bading recorded on 26-06-2010, in which it has been stated that in the village construction of the house of Gunu Nayak was going on and the villagers were to be fed Hadiya for putting the wooden logs on the roof and the Hadiya was prepared by Soma Bading (appellant). On 25-06-2010, several villagers had consumed Hadiya in the house of Soma Bading. It has been stated that the uncle and aunt of the informant, namely, Mangra Bading and Etwari Bading had gone for
The court emphasized the necessity of a fair trial, particularly the proper questioning of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., leading to the overturning of a flawed conviction.
The court upheld the conviction based on circumstantial evidence, establishing a clear motive and reliable witness testimonies linking the appellant to the murder.
Conviction under IPC 302/34 upheld on reliable sole eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence and witnesses, despite minor discrepancies and non-examination of investigating officer/docto....
The credibility of eyewitness testimonies, especially from witnesses with a relationship to the deceased, and the appreciation of evidence considering the socio-economic and educational background of....
A single witness's testimony can only sustain a conviction if wholly reliable; the presence of multiple hostile witnesses necessitates rigorous evidence scrutiny and adherence to the principle of par....
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to meet its burden of proof due to significant evidential inconsistencies and procedural errors, leading to the acquittal of the accused-appellants.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain leading to the only conclusion of guilt, supported by credible witness testimonies and admissions by the accused.
The conviction for murder based solely on a solitary eyewitness's testimony was overturned due to contradictions and lack of corroboration from other witnesses.
The court affirmed that involvement in a scuffle leading to murder, even without eyewitnesses to the assault, suffices for conviction under common intention.
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
