Back
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA ; CUTTACK
S.K.MISHRA, SAVITRI RATHO
Buta @ Bidyadhar Parida – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. defendant's convictions for multiple crimes are based on circumstantial evidence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defense presented witnesses denying involvement of defendants. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. motive established through circumstantial evidence, leading to conviction. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. arguments presented challenging the reliability of evidence and prosecution's burden. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. extra-judicial confession must be substantiated by material evidence. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. admission of guilt questioned due to lack of supportive testimony. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. insufficient evidence leads to overruling lower court's verdict. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 8. appeal granted; defendants acquitted of all charges. (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
In this appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order of conviction dated 12.2.2001 for the offence under Sections 120 - B/302/201/419/420/468 of the I.P.C. (hereinafter referred to as the “Penal Code” for brevity) passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in S.T. Case No.100/1996. Appellant No.1 has been convicted for the offence under 120-B/302/201/419/420/468 of the Penal Code and appellant no.2 has
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
