Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, M.JOTHIRAMAN
Udayalekha W/o Udayabalan – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judgment of conviction against a2. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. trial court proceedings against a2. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. evidence presented by prosecution. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. arguments by a2's counsel regarding innocence. (Para 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 5. court's analysis of circumstantial evidence. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 6. final ruling and dismissal of appeal. (Para 46 , 47 , 48) |
JUDGMENT :
P.Velmurugan J.
This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai in S.C.No.141 of 2018 dated 08.08.2019 convicting and sentencing the appellant, who was tried as A2, to undergo life imprisonment each for the offence under Sections 120-B and 302 r/w 109 IPC, ordered to run concurrently.
2. Totally two accused were arrayed as A1 & A2 before the trial Court in S.C.No.141 of 2018 and pending trial, since A1 died, the charges framed him stood abated, necessitating the passing of the judgment of conviction and sentence against A2 by the trial Court. For convenience, the accused will be referred to as arrayed before the trial Court, in this judgment.
3. The respondent Police filed the charge sheet against the
The court established that no direct evidence is necessary for conviction if circumstantial evidence clearly establishes motive, connection, and participation in the crime.
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....
The prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to lack of direct evidence and discredited circumstantial evidence.
Conviction requires not just evidence of guilt but also an established motive and reliable eyewitness accounts; procedural inaccuracies can compromise the prosecution's case.
The prosecution's failure to establish reliable eyewitness identification and conspiratorial actions led to the acquittal of all appellants due to reasonable doubt.
Point of Law : Circumstantial Evidence - Conviction set aside - lingering doubts that pervades every aspect of the evidence led, persuades to give the accused the benefit of doubt and acquit them of ....
The judgment emphasizes the need for a complete chain of evidence and the inadmissibility of unreliable witness testimony and confession in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on circums....
It is one of the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent till he is proved to be guilty. It is equally well settled that suspicion howsoever strong....
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
