Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Ignoring Court-Mandated PWD Safety Report Invalidates Municipal Order: J&K&L High Court
06 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Reserves Verdict in Raju Tampering Conviction Plea
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Bhaba @ Bhabagrahi Panda – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
SIBO SANKAR MISHRA, J.
The present Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7th of August 1990 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. Case No.91 of 1984. By the said judgment, the learned trial Court found the appellants guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 457 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years for offence U/s.395 of the Indian Penal Code and further R.I. for 6 months for offence under Section 457 of IPC. All substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Vide order of this Court dated 01.07.2025, the appeal stood abated qua appellant no. 3, he having expired in the year 2017. During hearing of the present appeal, when the judgment was reserved, learned counsel for the State submitted tha
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; appellate review requires solid evidence to uphold conviction, especially regarding armed dacoity and trespass.
Minor discrepancies in witness statements do not negate the credibility of their core testimony when corroborated by medical evidence.
The prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and contradictions in witness testimonies, along with the absence of corroborative evidence, can lead to an acquitta....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in dacoity cases, and minor discrepancies in witness testimonies do not invalidate the conviction if the overall evidence is credible.
The appellate court found the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to material inconsistencies in witness testimonies regarding the alleged dacoity.
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt; failure to provide corroborative evidence and reliance on unreliable witness testimony undermines conviction under dacoity with murder.
For conviction under dacoity, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt with corroborative evidence; mere identity of accused is insufficient without direct involvement in the crime.
The prosecution must prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt, and corroborating evidence is essential. Non-examination of key witnesses, lack of corroboration, and inconsistencies in the evidence ca....
The judgment emphasized the importance of proving the possession of stolen property by the accused and the need to examine the investigating officer to establish the occurrence and recovery of looted....
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
Listen Article