Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Champa Oraon, son of Nuda Oraon – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) – Respondent
Judgment :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. At the very outset, Mr. Pankaj Kumar, the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that appellant No.1, namely, Etwa Oraon has died on 07.01.2001.
2. No application to sue the proceeding on behalf of the legal representative has been filed as yet.
3. Accordingly, the instant appeal against the appellant no.1, namely, Etwa Oraon stands abated.
4. Now the present appeal exists only against appellant Champa Oraon.
Prayer
5. The present appeal has been filed under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction dated 17.12.1997 and order of sentence dated 18.12.1997, passed by the learned 1st Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in Sessions Trial No.29 of 1993, whereby and whereunder, the learned court below has convicted the appellant under sections 302/34, 201 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo RI for life under section 302/34 of the IPC, RI for one year for the offence punishable u/s 201 of and RI for three months for the offence punishable under section 379 of . All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Factual Matrix:
6. The prosecution case, in brief, as per fardbeyan date
Conviction on sole eyewitness testimony requires reliability and ring of truth; unsustainable amid inconsistencies, improbabilities like post-alcohol escape, absent corroboration, forensics, warranti....
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....
The conviction cannot stand if eyewitness testimony is contradictive and lacks corroboration, underscoring the necessity for reliability in criminal prosecutions.
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....
Conviction can be upheld based on the reliable testimony of a sole eyewitness, irrespective of the presence of corroborating evidence or independent witnesses, as long as the evidence is credible.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, and the importance of credible and consistent witness testimonies.
Conviction can be based on a sole eyewitness if credible, but significant inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to acquittal.
Conviction for murder by unlawful assembly sustainable on reliable sole eyewitness to killing, corroborated by medical evidence and abduction witnesses, despite FIR delay, witness non-examination, an....
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
