Back
SANJAY VASHISTH
Mahabir Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Vashisth, J. - This judgment shall dispose of CRA-S-1825-SB-2004 and CRA-S-433-SB-2005, as both the appeals are interconnected and are arising out of the same judgment of conviction dated 13.08.2004 and order of sentence dated 14.08.2004. However, for the sake of brevity, facts are being extracted from CRA-S-1825-SB-2004.
2. CRA-S-1825-SB-2004 has been filed by appellants namely; (1) Mahabir, (2) Gian @ Giani, and (3) Gurdas, and CRA-S-433-SB-2005, has been filed by appellant - Shyam Lal against the judgment of conviction dated 13.08.2004 and order of sentence dated 14.08.2004, passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula, in Sessions Case No. 26 of 12.11.2003, arising out of FIR No.164, dated 06.08.2003, under Sections 399, 402 of IPC, registered at Police Station Kalka. Accused-appellants were held guilty for commission of offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC, and were ordered to undergo sentence(s), as detailed in the following table:
Name of Convict | Under Section | Sentence | Fine | In Default |
Mahabir, Gian @ Giani, Gurdas, and Shyam Lal | 399 IPC | 04 years RI | Rs. 500/-each | 02 months SI |
402 IPC | 03 years RI | Rs. 500/-each | 02 months SI |
3. Facts emerging from Fir
The judgment emphasizes the importance of corroborative evidence and the statutory requirements for defining dacoity under Section 399 of IPC, highlighting the need for the prosecution to establish t....
The prosecution must prove intent and preparation beyond reasonable doubt; mere presence armed does not constitute guilt without corroborative evidence.
The court ruled that the failure of prosecution to corroborate witness testimonies and resolve inconsistencies led to the acquittal of the accused.
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....
For a conviction under IPC Section 395, participation of five or more persons is essential, and identification procedures must meet legal standards; failure leads to acquittal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that for conviction under Section 395 IPC, the involvement of five or more persons is necessary, as per the definition of dacoity in Section 391....
The court upheld the conviction based on corroborative evidence despite non-compliance with Section 65-B of the Evidence Act regarding electronic records.
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
