Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
LISA GILL, RITU TAGORE
Satpal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Lisa Gill, J.
1. Appellant has filed this appeal challenging judgment dated 21.10.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa whereby he has been convicted for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 201 IPC as well as order of sentence dated 24.10.2013 vide which appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. It is directed that life imprisonment in this case would mean imprisonment for whole life. Appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, besides, pay a fine of '75,000/- and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for offence under Section 201 IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case as per prosecution version are that, on 27.10.2010 ASI Raj Kumar (PW16), alongwith HC Pardeep Kumar and other officials were present at Barnala Road, Sirsa for patrolling and crime detection, when they received a telephonic message that head of a woman was found lying in the tank of Water Works situated at Chhatargarh Patti. ASI Raj Kumar (PW16) alongwith other officials reached at Water Works, Chhatargarh Patti where the
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain conclusively proving guilt; failure to provide plausible explanations by the accused strengthens the case for conviction.
The mere recovery of a body from an accused's statement is insufficient for conviction under murder charges; corroborative evidence is essential.
Sections 26 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved against him.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the chain of events pointing exclusively to the guilt of the accused-appellant was not established based on circumstantial evidence.
Point of law: Conviction set aside – Murder case - duty is cast upon the prosecution to produce worthwhile evidence to establish the guilt against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
Point of Law : Section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reveals that whenever a Court desires to give judgment as to any legal right or liability depend on the existence of facts which he asserts....
Section 106 of the Evidence Act reads Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge – When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.
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
