Back
Monu – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.
1. The accused appellant has filed the instant appeal assailing the judgment and order dated 7.04.2014 and 11.04.2014, passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Ghaziabad in S.T. No.1408 of 2006 convicting him under Section 302 IPC and awarding rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.50,000/-and in default in payment thereof, to three years additional simple imprisonment and under Section 506 IPC to seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/-and in default in payment thereof, to ten months additional simple imprisonment and in Sessions Trial No.1409 of 2006 under Section 25 (1) (b) of the Arms Act, to three years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default in payment thereof, additional simple imprisonment of six months.
2. According to the prosecution case, on 13.6.2006 at about 10:30 p.m., accused Monu (appellant) and Khalid, neighbours of the victim Manju Sharma came to her house while she was sitting on a cot alongwith her daughter Komal (PW-1) on the open terrace. Her mother Sheela and brother Yogesh and Nitin were in the courtyard. Monu had some talk with her. After about five minutes, he too
1) When there is similar or identical evidence of eyewitnesses against two accused by ascribing them same or similar role, court cannot convict one accused and acquit other.(2) In cases where injurie....
The duty to assess medical evidence, the reliability of eyewitnesses, and the inconclusiveness of ballistic reports in cases supported by unimpeachable eyewitness testimony.
The prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to reliance on uncorroborated eyewitness testimony from interested parties and lack of independent evidence.
The prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to contradictions in witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence.
A conviction for murder cannot be sustained solely on expert testimony without corroborative evidence, especially when eyewitnesses contradict the prosecution's case.
Conviction can be based on a sole eyewitness if credible, but significant inconsistencies and lack of corroborative 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
