Back
RAMESH SINHA, SAROJ YADAV
Mohd. Aslam – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SAROJ YADAV, J.
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the sole appellant/convict Mohammad Aslam against the judgment and order dated 30.01.2004 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, District Hardoi in Sessions Trial No. 241 of 2002, Crime No. 318 of 2001 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1861 (in short IPC), Police Station Mallawan District Hardoi, whereby the appellant has been held guilty under Section 302 of I.P.C. and sentenced with life imprisonment coupled with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment of two years.
2. The facts in short necessary for disposal of this appeal are as under:
Point of Law - It is crystal clear in the catena of judgement that statement of witness recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. does not fall within the ambit of evidence. Such evidence is only for confro....
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, all links in the evidence chain must be established beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
There was no eye witness as to actual assault on body of deceased which lead to her death and as such, it can be said that conviction of appellant is based on circumstantial evidence.
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
