Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Darshan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
1. Since both the criminal appeals (supra) arise from a common judgment, therefore, they are amenable for a common verdict becoming recorded thereons.
2. Both the appeals (supra) are directed respectively by the convicts-appellants, against the verdict of conviction, as made on 24.10.2006, by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, upon, Session Case No. 89 of 2002, wherethrough, in respect of charges drawn for offences punishable under Sections 148, 302/149, 307/149, 325/149 and 323/149 of the IPC, he made a finding of conviction against the accused.
3. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order drawn on 28.10.2006, the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to impose upon the convicts (supra) both sentence(s) of imprisonment as well as of fine, but in the hereinafter extracted manner
"3. Keeping in view the nature of the offence and the attending circumstances of the case, all the convicts are sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for having committed offence punishable under section 302 read with section 149 Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for having committed the above said offence. In default of payment of fine, the defau
The conviction was upheld based on strong evidentiary links, including a confession and ballistic evidence, demonstrating the accused's culpability in murder and related firearms offences.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and a weak motive can undermine convictions; corroborated evidence must link defendants to the crime convincingly.
The establishment of mens rea through eyewitness accounts confirms collective criminal liability among participants in a murder, as vicarious responsibility persists even with varying roles in the ac....
The court emphasized that disclosure statements must be corroborated by credible evidence to establish guilt, and acquittals were upheld due to insufficient evidence against several accused.
The right to self-defense is limited by the necessity of proportionality and cannot be claimed when the defender has superior numbers and uses lethal force.
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt if it forms a complete chain pointing to the accused, even without direct evidence.
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 ....
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
