Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH, K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
Alankarakumar @ Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Kariyapatti Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 2) |
| 2. defendant argues against reliability of eyewitnesses (Para 3) |
| 3. prosecution asserts strong evidence of guilt (Para 4) |
| 4. court reviews arguments and evidence (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. discussion on reliability of injured witnesses (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. examination of delay in fir registration (Para 9) |
| 7. delay in fir forwarding not significant (Para 10) |
| 8. acquittal of co-accused does not affect case (Para 11) |
| 9. court confirms conviction under section 302 ipc (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
The appellant/Accused No.1 in S.C.No.67 of 2018 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar has filed this appeal challenging the following conviction and sentence imposed against him in the impugned judgment dated 17.02.2023.
2.Brief facts of the prosecution case:
According to the prosecution, the deceased, Senthil Kumar, and the first accused (appellant) were working as building contractors. Prosecution Witnesses (PW) 1, 2 (Velmurugan – second accused), and PW6 were masons working under them. These workers were engaged by the first accused for construction work at Mudukulathur, where they had been working for abou
The Court affirmed that the testimony of an injured eyewitness possesses significant evidentiary weight, and the premeditated nature of the attack ruled out claims of sudden provocation, justifying t....
Eyewitness testimony, particularly from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, even with minor inconsistencies in their accounts.
The testimony of an injured witness is generally considered reliable, and delays in FIR registration do not inherently undermine the prosecution's case.
The prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable eyewitness accounts, inconsistencies, and procedural irregularities in FIR registration.
Selective appreciation of indivisible eyewitness testimony to convict specific co-accused after acquitting others on the same evidence is impermissible. Furthermore, failure to confront the accused w....
Eyewitness testimony, especially from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, and minor inconsistencies do not negate the overall reliability of their accounts.
The court ruled that eyewitness evidence, despite familial bias, may be credible; thus, a conviction under Section 304(i) IPC was appropriate, reflecting mitigating circumstances and reevaluating the....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the evidence of injured witnesses to be reliable and free from material contradictions in order to sustain a conviction.
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
