Back
SURENDRA SINGH-I
Kamal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This criminal appeal has been instituted against the judgment and order dated 02.09.1995 passed by the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura in Sessions Trial No. 94 of 1992 (State vs. Ratan Singh & others) arising out of Case Crime No.138 of 1990, under Sections 307 & 506 IPC Police station Farah, District Mathura. By the impugned judgment and order the trial court convicted appellant Kamal Singh under Section 307 IPC and sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment. He was acquitted of the charge under section 506 IPC.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that informant Shiv Singh s/o Than Singh r/o Mahuan, Police Station Farah submitted a written report dated 21.07.1990 in Police Station Farah, Mathura to the effect that he is a witness in the case relating to murder of Sohan Singh. On account of which residents of his village accused Ratan singh s/o Pyare, Kamal Singh and Bharat Singh both sons of Ratan Singh have enmity with him. They have threatened him that if he gives evidence against them, he will be killed. In the intervening night of 20/21.07.1990 at about 12:00 pm, on the terrace of Rohan Singh s/o Jyoti of his village, informant Shiv Singh was having
The contested evidence and intent are sufficient to establish guilt under Section 307 IPC, notwithstanding deficiencies in investigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution successfully proved the case under Section 307 I.P.C against the convict appellant beyond reasonable doubt, based on the natur....
The prosecution failed to establish the identity of the assailant beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The intention to cause death and the sufficiency of the acts to cause death in the ordinary course of nature are essential elements of the offense of attempt to murder under Section 307 of the IPC. C....
The prosecution failed to substantiate charges beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
The prosecution must prove the intention or knowledge of causing death under Section 307 IPC, and the injury sustained must be established as a firearm injury. Lack of forensic evidence and inconsist....
Eyewitness testimony can decisively establish guilt even in the absence of motive and despite minor discrepancies.
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
