Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANANDA SEN, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Govind Das, son of Late Khuni Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
1. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State assisted with learned counsel for the informant in both the appeals.
2. The instant criminal appeals have been preferred by the appellants challenging their conviction and sentence for the offence under section 302 and 201 of IPC dated 30.10.2002/31.10.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge FTC-V, Deoghar in S.C. Case No.214 of 1996 and arising out of G.R. No.254 of 1995 (T.R. No.599 of 1996), whereby and whereunder the appellants were sentenced to undergone R.I. for life for the offence under section 302 of IPC and R.I. for three years for the offence under section 201 of IPC. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 01.06.1995 in the noon, the appellant No.1 Govind Das came to the house of the informant Jhula Devi (P.W.2) and asked her daughter-in- law to send her husband (since deceased) to him but on that day the informant’s son did not go to the house of Govind Das. On the next day i.e. on 02.06.1995 in the
Conviction under circumstantial evidence requires proof of an unbroken link of evidence establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt, not merely suspicion.
The conviction under Section 302 IPC was upheld due to compelling circumstantial evidence linking the appellant to the murder, ruling that suspicion alone is insufficient without definitive proof of ....
The reliance on suspicion without substantive evidence to convict is a serious legal error; convictions must be based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on eyewitness testimony and established motive, dismissing intoxication as a defense.
(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....
Murder conviction on circumstantial evidence requires complete unbroken chain excluding innocence; absent proof of foundational facts like last seen together and court direction, appellants entitled ....
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence, establishing the accused's guilt through a combination of testimonies, confessional statements, and lack of viable alterna....
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
