Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Kameshwar Yadav @ Kamleshwar Yadav @ Kiddu Yadav, son of Jhumak Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The present Appeal has been filed under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction dated 09.03.2017 and order of sentence dated 20.03.2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Lohardaga, in Sessions Trial Case No. 85 of 2016, whereby and whereunder, the learned Trial court has convicted the appellant under sections 148, 149/364, 149/379, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 27 of Arms Act and section 17(2) of C.L.A. Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for life with fine of Rs.10,000/- under section 364 r/w 149 and under section 302 of the IPC with default stipulation of RI for three months. The appellant is further sentenced to undergo RI for three years u/s 379 r/w 149 and u/s 148 of the . The appellant is further sentenced to undergo RI for three years and fine of Rs. 10,000 under section 27Arms Act and in default he shall further undergo RI for three months and he is further sentenced to undergo RI for three years u/s 17(2) of the C.L.A. Act. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Prosecution Case:
2. This Court, before proceeding to examine the legality and propriety of the
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....
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....
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 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 based on a sole eyewitness if credible, but significant inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to acquittal.
The need for reliable witness testimonies and corroborating evidence, especially in the absence of independent witnesses, to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt.
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
