Back
RAJIV GUPTA, MOHD. AZHAR HUSAIN IDRISI
Mihi Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi, J.
1. Heard Shri Apul Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant criminal appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 31.5.1983 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun in Session Trial No. 27 of 1981, arising out of Case Crime No. 162 of 1980, under Sections 302, 323 IPC, Police Station Jarif Nagar, District Budaun, whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment and also under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and awarded the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment.
3. It has been informed that appellant No. 1 Mihi Lal in Criminal Appeal No. 1557 of 1983 had already expired and as such, the instant appeal qua appellant No. 1 Mihi Lal was dismissed as abated by this Court vide order dated 27.10.2018.
4. As per the prosecution case, as unraveled in the FIR lodged by one Dumbar Singh, vide written report (Ex. Ka-1) dated 16.10.1980 at 8:45 PM, which was registered vide Case Crime No. 162 of 1980, under Sections 302/323 IPC
Eyewitness testimony from injured relatives is credible and can support a conviction, provided it is consistent and corroborated by medical evidence.
The court reiterated the importance of scrutinizing testimony from interested witnesses, considering the relevance of motive in establishing guilt, and disregarding minor discrepancies in witness tes....
The conviction of the accused was reversed due to insufficient corroboration of eye-witness accounts and the potential for false implication stemming from previous enmity.
Eyewitness testimony from relatives is admissible and credible if consistent and corroborated by medical evidence, regardless of their relationship to the victim.
The credibility of witness testimonies in criminal trials requires careful scrutiny, particularly when they are related to victims, and the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code to establish the shared common intention of the accused in committing the murder.
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
