MANOJ MISRA, SAMEER JAIN
Bal Govind Alias Govinda – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Misra, J.
1. The appellant – Bal Govind alias Govinda was tried in Special Sessions Trial No. 198 of 2020 and by the order of Special Judge, Pocso Act /Additional District & Sessions Judge, Jaunpur dated 06.03.2021 has been convicted under Sections 302, 376 AB, 201, 363 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) and under Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short POCSO Act) and, by order dated 08.03.2021, awarded punishment as follows:
(i) Death sentence for offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C;
(ii) Death sentence for offence punishable under Section 5/6 Pocso Act (as amended by Act No.25 of 2019);
(iii) Seven years R.I. and Rs. 5,000/- fine for offence punishable under Section 363 I.P.C. with a default sentence of one year;
(iv) Seven years R.I. and Rs. 5,000/- fine for offence punishable under Section 201 I.P.C. with a default sentence of one year.
All sentences to run concurrently.
2. As death sentence was awarded, a reference (i.e. Reference No.4 of 2021) was made to the High Court under Section 366 Cr.P.C. for confirmation of death penalty. The appellant, who is in jail, expressing his inability to engage a counsel of his cho
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Panchhi and others Vs. State of U.P.
Dattu Ramrao Sakhare and others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Suryanarayana Vs. State of Karnataka
State of U.P. Vs. Ramesh and another
Hanumat Govind Nargundkar & Anr. V. State of Madhya Pradesh
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda V. State of Maharashtra
Vijay Shankar V. State of Haryana
Kanhaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan
Ramreddy Rajesh Khanna Reddy & Another V. State of A.P.
It is well settled that to sustain a conviction, where evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should, in the first instance, be fu....
Point of Law : Contradictory statements regarding extra judicial confession made by the accused/appellant, we are of the view that such type of extra judicial confession has no such value in the eye ....
Murder – “Last seen” doctrine has limited application, where time lag between time deceased was seen last with accused and time of murder is narrow – Court should not convict an accused only on the b....
Point of Law : Evidence suggesting that the accused was seen in the company of the deceased on the date of occurrence can at best raise grave suspicion about his involvement but the same.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.