Back
M. S. RAMESH, C. KUMARAPPAN
Babu @ Thilagar Babu – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Valavanur Police Station – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant/accused in S.C.No.610 of 2013 dated 05.02.2019 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court), Villupuram.
The instant Criminal Appeal has been filed against the order of conviction and sentence dated 05.02.2009 passed in S.C.No.610 of 2013, by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Villupuram, wherein, the accused was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, along with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment, and for the offence under Section 324 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment, along with a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in the appeal are addressed according to their ranks in the trial Court.
3.1. For better understanding of the prosecution's case, we deem it appropriate to flitter the facts of the case. According to the prosecution, the deceased and the accused we
The testimony of an injured witness is generally considered reliable, and delays in FIR registration do not inherently undermine the prosecution's case.
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.
Eyewitness testimony, particularly from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, even with minor inconsistencies in their accounts.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and significant procedural irregularities or unreliable witness testimony can lead to an acquittal.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; any reasonable doubt benefits the accused.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient and inconsistent evidence led to the acquittal of the accused.
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
