Back
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, VINOD DIWAKAR
Nabi Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar, J.-We have heard Shri Raghuvansh Misra, Shri Vimlendu Tripathi, Shri Rajeev Lochan Shukla, learned counsels for the appellants, Shri I.D. Mishra learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The accused-appellants-Nabi Ahmad, Banta @ Beant Singh, Rizwan, Farookh, Amanveer Singh, Ranjeet Kaur, Karam Singh and Gurpawan Kaur have been convicted in Sessions Trial No. 379 of 2017 (State of Uttar Pradesh v. Amanveer Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 419 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 307/149, 302/149, 506 I.P.C., alongwith connected Sessions Trial Nos. 377 of 2017 and 378 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime Nos. 431 of 2017 and 432 of 2017 respectively, Police Station Bisalpur, District Rampur and the maximum sentence of life imprisonment is awarded to all the accused-appellants. The rest of the sentences are lesser sentences, and all the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant's real brother Gurcharan Singh was murdered about two and a half years ago due to family enmity over land, whose case is pending trial in District Rampur. An attempt was also made t
The judgment underscores the importance of eyewitness testimony and medical evidence in establishing guilt in serious criminal cases, particularly murder.
The judgment establishes that inconsistencies in witness testimony and lack of corroborative evidence can warrant suspension of sentences pending appeal.
Insufficient evidence for conspiracy and murder conviction justifies bail for certain appellants.
Gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by court while exercising its discretion.
Suspending a sentence for a serious offence like murder requires a rare demonstration of exceptional circumstances, without re-evaluating evidence during bail applications.
The judgment addresses the sufficiency of evidence in murder and conspiracy cases, emphasizing that mere presence or signaling cannot constitute complicity in a crime.
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
