Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, M.JOTHIRAMAN
Murugan S/o Madhu – Appellant
Versus
State Rep. by Inspector of Police Kondalampatty Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's analysis of evidence and witness testimonies (Para 3 , 4 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 2. arguments against circumstantial evidence (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. reassessment of charges and final verdict (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. final sentence and order of the court (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT :
1. These criminal appeals have been preferred against the judgment passed by the learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Salem in S.C.No.179 of 2016 dated 30.07.2019 convicting the appellants for the offence(s) and to undergo the sentence(s) as detailed hereunder:-
Challenging the above judgment of conviction and sentence, A1 has preferred Crl A No.237 of 2021, A2 has preferred Crl A No.155 of 2020 and A3 has preferred Crl A No.738 of 2019, respectively. Since the appeals are arising out of the common judgment, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common judgment. For convenience, the appellants will be hereinafter referred to as A1, A2 & A3 in this judgment.
(a) A1 to A3 were the residents of Akkarapalayam Lakshmanur Village. One Kala, D/o Nagaraj also belongs to the above said village. She was married to one Selvam of Harur and since Selvam died 4 years prior to
The court clarified that provocation mitigates murder to manslaughter under Section 304 IPC, confirming that circumstantial evidence and motive can support conviction despite lack of direct witnesses....
Prosecution must establish a clear chain of circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime; reliance on uncorroborated confession renders conviction unsustainable.
The court reaffirmed that conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires clear establishment of motive, last seen theory, and connections through unbroken chains of evidence.
The prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to lack of direct evidence and discredited circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial Evidence - Prosecution has to prove each of the circumstance relied upon by them and the circumstances so proved should form a chain of events, which should lead to an irresistible con....
In a case arising out of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to prove each of the circumstances relied upon by them and the circumstances so proved should form a chain of events connecting t....
The prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a circumstantial evidence case, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a continuous chain without breaks; otherwise, the accused is entitled to acquittal due to 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
