Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
N.S.SHEKHAWAT, SUKHVINDER KAUR
State of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Inder Pal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N.S. Shekhawat, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 16.09.2003, passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby, the respondents were ordered to be acquitted of the charge.
2. As per the case of the prosecution, the FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Inder Kumar son of Suraj Nathand the same has been reproduced below:-
“Stated that I am resident of village Mehapur(Bihar) and do as Masonry work. Sunesh Kumar son of Lakhan Ram, Kamlesh son of Banesar and Janardhan son of Kaletar Ram, caste Ravidass residents of Mehapur(Bihar) and Pardeep Kumar who is also resident of Bihar and I am not aware about his full address we work as a masson andwe have been residing in village Kot Budha for the last 2 and half years. Inderpal son of Dhanpat Rai caste Khatri resident of village Kot Budha also work with us as a masson and Pardeep Kumar used to keep his earning money with Inder Pal. About 2/3 days earlier he used to go to Inderpal to take his money from Inder pal and Inder Pal used to put him of. Pardeep Kumar used to say that he has to go to his village in Bihar. Today at about 8 A.M. Inder Pa
principles relating to interference by the High Court in appeals against acquittal are well settled. While the High Court can review the entire evidence and reach its own conclusions, it will not int....
Appeals against acquittal warrant interference only if trial findings perverse or impossible; circumstantial case fails without complete chain excluding innocence, as here due to witness inconsistenc....
In appeals against acquittal, courts must find overwhelming evidence of guilt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
The acquittal of the accused is sustained as the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting the unreliability of witness testimonies and the significance of the presu....
Conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain of evidence; mere suspicion or non-explanation of conduct is insufficient for establishing guilt.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, which was not achieved in this case.
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
