Back
RITU BAHRI, MANISHA BATRA
Ajit alias Jeeta – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mrs. Manisha Batra, J.
The present appeal has been preferred against the judgement of conviction dated 10.01.2018 and order on quantum of sentence dated 12.01.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat in Sessions Case No.SC/268 of 2015 titled as State v. Ajit alias Jeeta arising out of FIR No.132 dated 08.04.2013 registered at Police Station Sadar, Sonipat under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC and Section 25 of ARMS ACT whereby the accused Ajit had been held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and had been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-.
2. The prosecution version as unfolded is that on 08.04.2013, on receipt of a telephonic information, a police party headed by SI Jai Parkash had reached at Murthal Road, Sonepat in front of Saraswati School wherein the dead body of an unknown youth was found to be lying. There were several firearm injuries on the dead body and some spent, live as well as empty cartridges were also found lying there. A case under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 25 of ARMS ACT was registered. Investigation proceedings were i
Confessions of co-accused are inadmissible against another unless tried jointly; conviction based solely on such confessions violates evidentiary standards.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence for conviction; extrajudicial confessions lack evidentiary value if not proven voluntary.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and conclusive chain of evidence that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence; mere suspicion is ....
The main legal point established is the requirement for corroborative evidence to establish guilt, the limitations of the memorandum statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, and the inadmissib....
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, requiring all circumstantial evidence to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
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
