Back
PRITINKER DIWAKER, NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Vimal Kumar Maurya – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.]
1. Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Amit Sinha, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Jaunpur convicted the appellant Vimal Kumar Maurya under Section 326-A IPC in Sessions Trial No.507 of 2013 arising out of Crime No.846 of 2013, Police Station Badlapur, District Jaunpur and sentenced him for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1 lakh with default sentence vide judgment and order dated 22.09.2014, feeling aggrieved of which the present criminal appeal has been filed.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is as under.
On 07.11.2013 at about 12:00 at night when the informant and her family members were sleeping in their house and injured Champa Devi, the mother-in-law and Madhuri, the sister-in-law (nand) of the informant were also sleeping in a room situated in the Usahra (baramda) in front of the window, some unknown person threw acid (tejab) from the window and caused grievous hurt and deformity on their faces. The injured ladies were taken to Government Hospital, but they were referred to Janpur and subsequently to Varanasi for further treatment.
4. First info
A conviction for an acid attack was overturned due to lack of credible evidence linking the accused, highlighting the necessity of substantial proof in sensitive cases involving caste dynamics.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere testimony of the victim is insufficient without corroboration.
Acid Attack - Eye witnesses - Admissibility of - As a consequence of fact that injuries to the witness is an inbuilt guarantee of his presence at scene of crime and because the witness would not want....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on convincing and trustworthy oral and medical evidence to affirm the conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offence of acid....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the reliability of the victim's testimony, corroboration from contemporaneous documents and medical evidence, recovery of evidence,....
Acid attack conviction under IPC §§304, 326A upheld on eyewitness testimony despite FIR delay and minor discrepancies; life sentence reduced to 14 years fixed term balancing retribution, time served,....
Acid attack – Acid attacks not only cause damage to physical appearance of its victims but also cause immense psychological trauma – Delay in filing FIR alone cannot refute entire prosecution story.
The prosecution failed to prove the appellant's identity and involvement in the crime beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the quashing of the conviction based on contradictory witness testimonies.
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
