Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
MANISHA BATRA
Sudhir – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manisha Batra, J.
This common order shall dispose of the aforementioned two appeals which have arisen out of common judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence dated 01.06.2024 passed in Sessions case No.35 of 2021 titled as State v. Sudhir and another arising out of FIR No.567 dated 14.07.2019 registered under Section 379-A of IPC at Police Station City, Panipat whereby the appellants had been held guilty and convicted by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat for commission of offence punishable under Section 379-A read with Section 34 of IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years each and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. Fine had not been paid.
2. The prosecution in this case had been launched on the basis of a complaint submitted by the complainant Gaurav on 14.07.2019 alleging that on the night of 09.07.2019 at about 11 PM, he was going from Bus Stand Panipat towards his Village Khozkipur, when two youths riding on a bike came to him and after snatching his mobile phone make VIVO-Y95
Identification in court serves as primary evidence, with errors in pre-trial identifications not automatically rendering testimonies invalid if verifiable by corroborating evidence.
The court emphasized that lack of essential documentation and procedural compliance invalidates the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused who were convicted of kidnapping for ra....
In criminal law, a conviction requires the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any doubts must benefit the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a wholesome and harmonious appraisal of evidence by the trial court to avoid misappreciation and non-appreciation of evidence.
Failure of prosecution to prove charge beyond reasonable doubt due to inordinate delay in FIR and weak identification evidence.
Prosecution must adhere to proper identification procedures; failure to conduct Test Identification Parades and reliance on inadequate evidence can lead to acquittal.
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
