Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ARUN KUMAR RAI
Indrajit Majhi, son of Late Bola Majhi – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. testimonies and defense claims. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. arguments regarding evidence and witness reliability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. principles of section 6 of the indian evidence act. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. court's assessment of evidence and judgment. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 6. conclusion and order of appeal. (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
ORDER :
ARUN KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Praveen Shankar Dayal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Jitendra Pandey, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.01.2005 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella in S.T. No. 28 of 1998, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 325/34 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default in payment of fine the appellants were to undergo further R.I. for one month.
3. The prosecution case is based on an F.I.R. which came into existence on the written report of R
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
