Back
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
Shankar @ Daddi – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Arvind Singh Sangwan, J.)
1. These appeals have been filed against the judgment of conviction dated 16.03.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. 1st, Lalitpur in Sessions Trial No. 25 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2008, under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 379, 411 IPC, Police Station – Poorakala, District – Lalitpul vide which all the appellants namely (1) Santosh Singh (2) Kalloo alias Kalyan Singh (3) Shankar alias Daddi (4) Ballu alias Balak Das (5) Toran Yadav (6) Rabuvir Yadav and (7) Bhan Singh have been found guilty of offence punishable under Section 147, 148, 302/149 IPC read with Section 149, 307/149 IPC and additionally accused Shankar alias Daddi was held guilty under Section 379 and 411 IPC and the order of sentence dated 17.3.2010 vide which, appellants were directed to undergo substantive sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302/149 IPC with fine of Rs. 10,000/- each, further ten years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 307/149 IPC with fine of Rs.30,000/- each, and one year sentence under Section 147 and 148 IPC each. Shankar alias Daddi was additionally awarded two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-
The judgment establishes that mere participation in a crime is not sufficient for conviction under Section 34 IPC; there must be evidence of common intention and active participation in the commissio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, taking into account the motive, presence of witnesses, and me....
The reliability of an injured eye-witness testimony and its corroboration by medical evidence are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Murder – Minor contradictions do not affect prosecution case.
: Every omission in statement recorded before Police or before Magistrate under Section 164-A Cr.P.C., but revealed in witness box cannot be by itself a reason to discredit statement of witnesses if ....
: Every omission in statement recorded before Police or before Magistrate under Section 164-A Cr.P.C., but revealed in witness box cannot be by itself a reason to discredit statement of witnesses if ....
The court found discrepancies in witness testimonies, lack of medical evidence, and illegal recovery of weapons, leading to the acquittal of the accused under Section 302 IPC.
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
