Back
J. NISHA BANU, N. ANAND VENKATESH
Subburam – Appellant
Versus
State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, against the judgment and order, dated 15.07.2019 in S.C.No.22 of 2016 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District.)
J. Nisha Banu & N. Anand Venkatesh, JJ.
1. The sole accused, who was convicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months Simple Imprisonment through judgment and order dated 15.07.2019, made in S.C.No.22/2016, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, has preferred this criminal appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Nagaraj had a family dispute with the appellant and there were repeated quarrels and hence the appellant had a motive to do away with the deceased. In furtherance of the same, on 14.04.2014, when the deceased returned back from Sivakasi and was getting down at Thulukankurichi bus stop and was walking near the tea shop of one Jeganathan at about 9.30 p.m., the appellant is said to have been waiting at that place, with M.O.6-knife and on seeing the dec
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the importance of corroborative evidence and witness cre....
Eyewitness testimony, particularly from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, even with minor inconsistencies in their accounts.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reliable and convincing evidence in proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on clear and cogent witness testimony, the role of witnesses in delivering justice, and the distinction between related and interested....
The conviction was affirmed based on consistent eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence, notwithstanding minor inconsistencies.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 355 of IPC in cases where the accused's act results in injury but without the intention to cause death.
The prosecution failed to establish a reliable case due to contradictions in witness testimonies and unexplained delays in lodging the FIR, leading to acquittal.
The standard of proof in a criminal case demands evidence beyond reasonable doubt, and contradictions in witness testimonies undermine the prosecution's case.
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
