Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, RAJESH KUMAR
Magan Munda, son of Late Pahan Munda – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.
1. The instant appeal under Sections 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 12.04.1999 and order of sentence dated 15.04.1999 passed by the learned Second Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti in S.T. No. 341/96 whereby and whereunder, the appellants named above together with one Pahan Munda (since dead after judgment) have been convicted under Sections 452 , 380, 364, 427 and 147 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and have been sentenced to undergo RI for life under Section 364 IPC, RI for 7 years under Section 452 IPC, RI for 3 years under Section 380 IPC, RI for two years under Section 427 IPC and RI for 2 years only under Section 147 IPC, and directed the above sentences to run concurrently.
2. At the outset it needs to refer herein that the initially the instant appeal had been preferred by the 12 accuse/appellants but during pendency of the instant appeal except Appellant no.9 Magan Munda and Appellant No.11 Lobin Munda the other 10 appellant died as such the instant appeal was abated against the said 10 appellants vide order dated 24.11.2023 and 20.12.2023.
Factual Matrix
3. The brief
In criminal cases, convictions must be based on evidence establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; general allegations without specific evidence against accused do not suffice.
Conviction under Section 302/34 IPC unsustainable on uncorroborated, contradictory testimony of interested sole eyewitness; benefit of reasonable doubt mandates acquittal where prosecution fails to p....
Conviction on sole eyewitness unreliable due to contradictions in assault manner/place, house layout inconsistency, suspicious family conduct; benefit of doubt where guilt not proved beyond reasonabl....
In criminal law, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and lack of direct evidence can lead to acquittal.
Convictions can be based on a sole eyewitness's testimony if credible; however, significant contradictions can undermine the prosecution's case, particularly regarding common intention under Section ....
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and significant discrepancies in eyewitness accounts can undermine the reliability of their testimonies.
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....
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
