Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, M.JOTHIRAMAN
P.Guna, W/o Backiyaraj – Appellant
Versus
State represented by The Inspector of Police, Killai Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal conduct established due to previous enmity. (Para 2 , 12) |
| 2. claims of motive and timeline addressed. (Para 7) |
| 3. eyewitness testimony and medical evidence corroborates account. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed by P.W.6/Guna challenging the order of acquittal dated 19.04.2018 passed in S.C.No.271 of 2012 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Court, Cuddalore @ Chidambaram.
(ii) Against A2 - 148 and 302 IPC
(iv) Against A6 to A10 - 148, 506(ii) and 302 r/w 149 IPC
3. During the course of trial, in order to prove the case of the prosecution, on the side of the prosecution, totally 17 witnesses were examined as P.Ws.1 to 17, and 14 documents were marked as Exs.P-1 to P-14, besides four Material Objects (M.Os). were exhibited.
5. Aggrieved by the said acquittal, neither the State nor the de-facto complainant / P.W.1 preferred any appeal, or any other injured witness file an appeal. However, P.W.6, the wife of the deceased, alone has filed the present Criminal Appeal, challenging the acquittal of the accused persons.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the trial Court erroneously concluded that there was n
The court ruled that specific acts of A1 and A2 resulted in grievous injury and death; acquittal of others was justified due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the importance of eyewitness reliabi....
The appellate court overturned the acquittal of the accused by establishing that reliable eyewitness and medical evidence confirmed their formation of an unlawful assembly leading to murder.
The appellate court affirmed that collective participation in unlawful assembly under IPC Section 149 holds all members culpable for resulting violent acts, despite minor evidential discrepancies.
The court reclassified a murder charge to culpable homicide due to unresolved doubts regarding witness credibility and the actual circumstances of the incident.
The conviction for murder was upheld based on the coherent and corroborated testimonies of injured witnesses, affirming that minor discrepancies do not negate the prosecution's case.
The conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC was upheld based on credible eyewitness testimony and established motive, affirming the trial court's findings despite minor contradictions in evidence....
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, while minor contradictions in witness testimony should not undermine the core evidence substantiating the charges.
The judgment underscores the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned without compelling evidence, emphasizing the importance of consistent and reliable witness testimonies in criminal ca....
Eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in murder cases involving conspiracy and unlawful assembly.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between culpable homicide and murder, based on the absence of premeditation, undue advantage, or cruel behavior by 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
